Hello There, Guest! Register

Q&A Moderation
Ashmo Offline
and Bud
Registered

Posts: 636
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2013
#91
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
Then why don't you open up word processor or note pad and record your research there? Why use up the resources on a free site that is funded by donation and out of the owner's own pocket for something that you aren't even going to share? If you want to share your findings later, then simply post it where people can see.
10-20-2013, 11:06 PM
Website Find Reply

Sponsors:
Valhal.la

Yori Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 338
Threads: 22
Joined: Jan 2013
#92
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
Ashmo, I don't think the person is in this thread. You'll probably have to PM them with that... if it is true that they'd be using resources up in the first place. Kinda makes me worried about future load... o.O could we seriously run out of space? I guess he'd just.. delete the old stuff..
(This post was last modified: 10-21-2013, 06:26 AM by Yori.)
10-21-2013, 06:26 AM
Find Reply
Sands Offline
And Roswell
Registered

Posts: 2,120
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2012
#93
 
Default  RE: Q&A Moderation
(10-20-2013, 10:28 PM)Yori Wrote: I don't see where I missed anything. You're saying "Yes" to what I said, acknowledging that I had uttered it myself, so how could I possibly have missed it?

Yori Wrote: In this case it was presented as a solution for the annoyance of questions that were already asked tho. Was only talking about it in context of this thread.

But you're bringing it up only now as if it hasn't been a part before? It has always been a part of the reason and it is a very obvious thing, which you at least are saying you have known about before. You just chose to not even acknowledge it while whining about whatever it was you whined about? Smart. Besides, maybe if you'd actually read things that have been linked, you'd know the entire thing and both sides of the argument well enough to actually participate.

(10-20-2013, 10:28 PM)Yori Wrote: There's a difference between avoiding people laughing at you and you yourself also not having faith in what you're doing.

Think about the implications of that board. It's a board for only some special circlejerk members that have been chosen by someone. It's not a completely private one (if it was, you can really... Do it offline, you know, no need for a goddamn forum), but one for a group of people. Said group of people could easily write their findings somewhere else as well like say, PMs or IRC or whatever. It's a hidden research board asked by someone with special beliefs that they aren't willing to share with others because they're being laughed at. Basically, they want to pretend they're doing research and can say "well I posted it in the secret one so hah, research! I am totally doing something important and I am a super smart INTJ programmer/researcher now!" even when it's being some private circlejerk about the size of someone's astral dick, because that totally is research and important.

If you don't want your research to be public? Don't make it public. You have so many other options than having your special criclejerk board on these forums that aren't about your special circlejerk. You can release the results, because obviously you would have to at least be comfortable in doing that here or else you just... Shouldn't even bring your research here in the first place. If you can't handle backlash, stop trying to do research. You can't handle it and you aren't going to be able to be objective, because you can't even see why someone might possibly be laughing at you. Your critics are very important in finding problems in how you try to test something, too. Being too biased makes for biased results. Hell, this even is a tulpa forum so tulpa-related stuff isn't automatically us laughing at your silly imaginary friends as an adult, unlike other actually scientific communities.

Maybe you should actually know what kind of a person Purlox is before you try talking about him. After all, #.info is a ~~hugpile~~! (his own words)

And Ashmo's not talking to the person we're talking about, just using "you" to name something s/he can address it to. S/he's kinda talking with you there, asking you why you (or someone else) couldn't do something else instead because the suggestion given is a bad one. Understanding the point of other people isn't that hard, come on.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
10-21-2013, 01:25 PM
Find Reply
Yori Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 338
Threads: 22
Joined: Jan 2013
#94
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
Sands, is the possibility of them pretending they did research threads really that significant? I think you're just trying to name reasons that they should be disallowed from it even though it's not hurting anything. It's not as if anything comes of it. You won't be recognized as some kind of researcher because you posted experiments or findings on the research board. Dismissed.

And, uh yeah, I didn't just randomly "bring it up." It was in response to what Ashmo said. I was clearing something up.
And I don't know how I "chose not to acknowledge it" when we were talking. It wasn't brought up. It would be one thing if someone was like "isn't merging threads a nice solution", but that wasn't in the discussion and I said I was fine with it when Nobilis said they were. I never trashed the solution. I don't see why only I have to randomly go "btw I think merging threads is fine" when no one else had to. The discussions I was in were about definitions, explaining not-googling, and earlier whether or not asking old questions was even an issue. (And I already said, that threads on the same frontpage could even be deleted from my POV so don't bring that up. And guess when I said that? When it *actually came up.* And I wasn't choosing not to acknowledge it before then.) I don't see where my not saying it during that is a conscious choice not to acknowledge jack. I could see if I was avoiding or ignoring it when it came back.
10-21-2013, 04:47 PM
Find Reply
Sands Offline
And Roswell
Registered

Posts: 2,120
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2012
#95
 
Default  RE: Q&A Moderation
It does hurt. Wasted space, fragments the community even more, adds less transparency when we really need more transparency in this community. It also makes the people who use it shielded from everything, which also includes a lot of good things. People need to learn that if they want to post something online, they gotta be willing to handle the consequences and our ~~hugpile~~ master obviously lacks that, as do many others in this community. There are no good reasons to have a hidden circlejerk board on these forums. If anything, they'll conduct a biased study and release faulty data. Your dismissal is dismissed, see, two can play this game ohno.

We have talked about the merging a lot in the past unless you missed the first few pages of this very thread. I do suggest that you actually read this stuff. And such talk was linked to you back when this conversation was a part of another thread so it had been brought up before, even. You've been talking about how merging shouldn't happen so people can keep answering the same questions over and over. That means the answers are all split in multiple threads and make it harder to find, not to mention all the rest of the shit it introduces. You weren't saying it's a bad idea. Doesn't seem like you were really acknowledging how much it helps when you merge threads when you were too busy screaming how the subject of these forums isn't using your brain or something. Lemme quote it again.

(10-19-2013, 05:20 PM)Yori Wrote: Um, waffles, I don't think the subject of the forum is using your brain and figuring things out for yourself.

I think I'll also quote where you're dead wrong because it hurts just how someone can possibly think this.

(10-19-2013, 05:20 PM)Yori Wrote: It's not encouraging people to be "lazy and stupid" if someone answers their question. I don't think not making sure that someone does a search on a forum rather than asking the question has much of an impact on their character at all, and I don't think that would affect their tulpa making either.

I suggest you lurk more before you try to talk of shit that's been going on for ages and it hasn't gone well. If anything, it attracts people like you, obviously. No searching needed my ass. If there's been a good point you've made this entire thread, it's been buried under all the absolutely bonkers stuff you've said. It's like Deviantart hugboxes.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
10-21-2013, 05:36 PM
Find Reply
Yori Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 338
Threads: 22
Joined: Jan 2013
#96
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
"It does hurt. Wasted space, fragments the community even more, adds less transparency when we really need more transparency in this community. It also makes the people who use it shielded from everything, which also includes a lot of good things. People need to learn that if they want to post something online, they gotta be willing to handle the consequences and our ~~hugpile~~ master obviously lacks that, as do many others in this community. There are no good reasons to have a hidden circlejerk board on these forums. If anything, they'll conduct a biased study and release faulty data. Your dismissal is dismissed, see, two can play this game ohno."

So when things are hidden, the space is 'wasted'? What about the private questions to moderators board? Someone who thinks it's "sneaky" to do that could just say that everyone should ask their questions in the open like other forums do and not 'waste space.' And no, they aren't shielded from everything... they are still subject to moderation just like people in the private conversations board. No, they don't 'need to learn' that, Sands. All they need to learn is what they have to do in the specific situations. (ex: PMs. Not entirely private because someone could spill what you say and admin can look, for instance.) Purposely making it someway is *YOU* making it so they have to 'deal with the consequences.'

Um, there's not a good enough reason for -you-. It's not like there's a reason we *need* the other even-more private board either. It just doesn't bother -you- since it isn't active with principles you're amused by. Them going somewhere else online to do it also doesn't 'teach them' either. They just went somewhere else to be private. I don't think there's needs to be some great excuse in the first place. You're not giving good enough reasons that they should be disallowed; prohibited; barred;prevented, etc.

Oh no, a biased study! The "release" (posting online) of "faulty data!" (because this is some kind of peer-reviewed journal viewed by Tops and so people will just take it as face value and not actually look at what they're saying and conclude for themselves that it's biased/faulty/bad/etc) because there's a team combing through the open research board in the first place to make sure everything is unbiased and no faulty data is there. Special strict terms for hidden boards.

"We have talked about the merging a lot in the past unless you missed the first few pages of this very thread. I do suggest that you actually read this stuff."

I was only replying to the conversation that I read, not every single post in the thread. I'm sure that's allowed. Just accept that I wasn't dissing merging nor was I choosing not to acknowledge it.

"And such talk was linked to you back when this conversation was a part of another thread so it had been brought up before, even."

Don't remember that happening. But I'm not asking for proof or saying you're lying. Doesn't matter.

"You've been talking about how merging shouldn't happen so people can keep answering the same questions over and over. That means the answers are all split in multiple threads and make it harder to find, not to mention all the rest of the shit it introduces. You weren't saying it's a bad idea."

So I was talking about how merging shouldn't happen, yet I wasn't saying it's a bad idea? Make up your mind. I never once said that merging shouldn't happen. I specifically cleared this up. I said, that there's no reason to generally demand people *ignore their questions* and stop answering *if they want to.* And that I myself am not demanding that users answer questions whenever they see them. That's what I said.

"Doesn't seem like you were really acknowledging how much it helps when you merge threads when you were too busy screaming how the subject of these forums isn't using your brain or something. Lemme quote it again."


Uh, I was replying to the replies I was given. I wasn't "too busy" doing anything. There's lots of things to acknowledge in this thread, I'm sure. But I'm replying to the replies I was given. I didn't know that I was a crime. And that was more of a two post thing. After the 2nd I was done with the whole semantic "brain" thing with waffles. And I wasn't screaming about that.

And no, I don't need to lurk more. I don't need to acknowledge every single thing in the thread to converse with people about certain points they had. I'm not going to bring up every other point in the thread when that's not even what I'm responding to. I don't know why you have a bone to pick with me about me not acknowledging how osum a solution merging is before. I said it now. It's not like there was any change in my arguments or what you were replying to, though.. soo.. Everything I said before then hasn't changed.

"If anything, it attracts people like you, obviously."
HAHAHAHA...
Yes, because I didn't specifically say that I'm a searcher, and not only do I fucking search the forum with the only search tool provided, I also use Google to try to search the forum (I already detailed how I search the site specifically with Google. Not saying it again.) when the forum search tool isn't enough.

Honestly, as far as you go, reading past posts, I think the underlying problem is that you like to pick at people; have reasons to try to hinder them from doing this or that [in this case you were biased against their metaphysical belief system. "Oh, those metaheads..lol. hm? private forum? Oh no you don't. Come out here so I can read it.] or call them idiotic for something. It reminds me of someone else I knew of who said someone was an idiot for just about anything quite a lot; fellow who thought himself very intelligent though. A "looking down on them" kind of guy. I didn't see it; his intellectual prowess. A reason for the state of his ego.
(This post was last modified: 10-21-2013, 08:09 PM by Yori.)
10-21-2013, 07:58 PM
Find Reply
Sands Offline
And Roswell
Registered

Posts: 2,120
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2012
#97
 
Default  RE: Q&A Moderation
(10-21-2013, 07:58 PM)Yori Wrote: So when things are hidden, the space is 'wasted'?

Yes, it is. It has to be stored somewhere, hidden or not. It doesn't just magically exist nowhere because you can't see it.

The hidden moderator boards are stupid as well. The one the moderators use to talk shit behind our backs, that's useless and fucks with transparency again. They have IRC channel for mod talk yet they continue to use their hidden board. Useless and waste of space, them again being scared of us seeing the shit they talk about. The hidden board I believe you're actually talking about it useless as well, seeing that you can again easily handle the shit through IRC or PMs. The hidden research board is still the worst offender. Or maybe the second worst offender if you see the private mod circlejerk board the worst one, but another elite circlejerk isn't going to help us at all.

Oh and yes, people do need to learn how to handle critique. Have you maybe been to the internets recently? Seen the kids screaming and whining because someone dared to help them with someone asnd - gasp - didn't only give them praise? The horror. It's a huge fucking problem and these same people are going to fail at life if they think work will be like their hugbox telling them they're super special perfect snowflakes.

This is a scientific community and the research we do should be that. Unless you can show it, don't do it. And if you do it, don't do it here. It's not the place for you.

(10-21-2013, 07:58 PM)Yori Wrote: Oh no, a biased study! The "release" (posting online) of "faulty data!" (because this is some kind of peer-reviewed journal viewed by Tops and so people will just take it as face value and not actually look at what they're saying and conclude for themselves that it's biased/faulty/bad/etc) because there's a team combing through the open research board in the first place to make sure everything is unbiased and no faulty data is there. Special strict terms for hidden boards.

Welcome to .info, where the head honchos making bullshit research will be eaten up by the idiots no matter what because they use smart words and it has numbers that they don't understand, but totally mean something. Totally. When someone others like says something, people will basically take it as gospel. Also, the research would be wasted when it has been biased. Maybe if it wasn't hidden, others could have said that there's a huge problem and it could've been saved, ohno!

Also you know who are going to be a part of that secret circlejerk board for sure? The .info mods. Do you know what .info mods are quite infamous for? (You would if you lurked enough)

Lemme make it easy and tell you right away. They always back each other up and can't admit they or someone else made a mistake. Got high hopes for one mod at the moment but well, one against many...

(10-21-2013, 07:58 PM)Yori Wrote: So I was talking about how merging shouldn't happen, yet I wasn't saying it's a bad idea? Make up your mind. I never once said that merging shouldn't happen. I specifically cleared this up. I said, that there's no reason to generally demand people *ignore their questions* and stop answering *if they want to.* And that I myself am not demanding that users answer questions whenever they see them. That's what I said.

I see I worded it in a weird way, so let me rephrase it. You were talking about how merging shouldn't happen and you didn't even once mention how not merging is a bad idea as it messes with the searching.

It's less about telling people not to answer and more about telling the people about to post questions to search. It's like you have missed the entire point of the annoyance and laziness side of the argument. People are free to post their answers... In the old threads any possibly new questions have been merged to.

(10-21-2013, 07:58 PM)Yori Wrote: And no, I don't need to lurk more.

Oh yes you do. Your newbie-ness is showing so much it's painful to watch. Maybe if you actually lurked more, you'd know what's wrong here and what kind of suggestions have offered. Hell, again, threads about this have been linked to you before, you could've just clicked and read.

(10-21-2013, 07:58 PM)Yori Wrote: Yes, because I didn't specifically say that I'm a searcher, and not only do I fucking search the forum with the only search tool provided, I also use Google to try to search the forum (I already detailed how I search the site specifically with Google. Not saying it again.) when the forum search tool isn't enough.

Yes, people just like you. You did kind of ask for this now, so I'll just lay it down for you, even if it leads into warnings because hugbox mods. The fact you search doesn't even matter. You're not exactly making the best points, you're screaming like a little kid after someone says something negative about you or your point, try using bolded text to pretend it somehow has more power or makes you look intelligent and overall looking like someone who is very young and naïve. You don't see the points of everyone else who has actually been around to acknowledge them and you're even suggesting people to break the rules of these very forums because you think we shouldn't try to be professional. You reasonings for things are pretty absurd and you're only really thinking about yourself instead of the entire community, which is failing and badly right now. And it won't last until something is done and that something is going to have to include a way to deal with people like you, too. You also act like you're being attacked when we're just being honest here, talking about our view on the matter and what exactly is wrong with this community. (spoilers: people like you)

I was wondering when .info was going to get its first real lolcow. These logs are some pretty hilarious stuff and I'm glad they happened. Must save the funnies for later.

(10-21-2013, 07:58 PM)Yori Wrote: [in this case you were biased against their metaphysical belief system. "Oh, those metaheads..lol. hm? private forum? Oh no you don't. Come out here so I can read it.]

Guess what .info is? A forum meant for the non-metaphysical view of tulpas. Enjoy your stay.

I always thought the sign of smartassery was the amount of bolds or all caps or other text style changes because the person can't actually emphasize their point without. Or maybe they assume others are stupid and can't read. Maybe you should go back to DeviantArt or Tumblr or whatever it is kids hugbox in these days. You don't seem like the kind of a person who can handle critique and trust me, you're going to get that here. Aaaand you don't seem to think like it's an important skill for people to learn...

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
10-21-2013, 10:00 PM
Find Reply
Ashmo Offline
and Bud
Registered

Posts: 636
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2013
#98
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
I feel like I want to add things...but honestly Sands, I think you got this shit. I'm just going to continue to watch and be entertained...
10-21-2013, 10:41 PM
Website Find Reply
Yori Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 338
Threads: 22
Joined: Jan 2013
#99
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
Yes, it is. It has to be stored somewhere, hidden or not. It doesn't just magically exist nowhere because you can't see it.

Your only argument there about wasted space is that it's taking space with a cap on it, and since you can't see it, it's a waste. With that reasoning, we should disable PMs too. Privacy is not a waste. And of course, if something is hidden, it isn't transparent. Ingrained argument in your text that says that unless a space is completely unhidden it's flawed.

Sure, some people need to handle criticism, but they don't need to subject everything they write to it. Sometimes people can write just to X, Y, or Z. They're not going to fail at life if they fail to be open to everyone. it's a bit extreme to try to make an argument that everything someone types online should be viewable to absolutely everyone, including groups that are already biased against it, for this reason. Some of us here don't want a lot of people know about tulpa for instance. You're not biased against tulpa, though, of course.

It's the metaphysical itself that they wanted it hidden for. I don't think metaphysical people need to always open themselves to criticism to the opposed.

I don't see why you wouldn't be against the existence of closed groups, or private messaging (apart from things like personal details, I guess? then that's a danger and not just avoiding criticism), or the edit/delete button on this forum.

Someone others like? That implies the audience is people that are already on this board. You sounded as if you were talking about observers, the whole "because this needs to be presentable" argument. There goes your "the research should be scientific" part.

Yet you're not going around checking all the research that people can see or proposing an approval team, are you? Bring it up for the board you don't like, though. The board would be hidden anyway. No one would have to see the unscientific horrors of the metaphysical. (With that, you probably want the metaphysical section gone too, despite the fact that it is also separated from open research boards).

Your argument that it'll be a circle jerk and they'll get to talk about other people, bla bla, is also pretty much useless because there's a such thing as PMs, and they can still do it there. So, be consistent and propose we get rid of private messaging too.

And again, I was not talking about how merging should not happen. This is libel. I started responding the parts that were saying people shouldn't answer repeat questions, bla bla. I said they should if they want. As for merging, again, don't mind as long as they know that's where it is and it's actually viewable rather than being buried where it was (which still results in you seeing it, yes.)

Ok, right, it's because I'm new. You get to feel your seniority and thus superiority over me. The newbies and the old timers. Pft. Did you know that even people who were here from the start of the forum don't read every single page of a thread and reply to everything in there? It's not a "newbie" thing. I've been at other forums, too, anyway. Me being an old regular there didn't persuade me to read all/reply all or don't bother replying to this conversation in this thread, etc.

"The fact you search doesn't even matter. You're not exactly making the best points, you're screaming like a little kid after someone says something negative about you or your point, try using bolded text to pretend it somehow has more power or makes you look intelligent and overall looking like someone who is very young and naïve."

I don't see where I ever screamed because someone said something negative about me. And no, the bolded text isn't for more power or making me look intelligent. You know that. That's a new one. "I think people use bolded text to look smart" Uh, no. It's an aid, bro. A courtesy. Just like when I color text. Just like when I edit what I write over and over, preview it, etc. I guess you'd just say I'm doing coloring to make sure I look intelligent too. I have never come across someone saying that trying to improve your message is trying to be powerful or look intelligent.
Sometimes, bold is just emphasis too. Just like * * or ~ ~ or / /.

"You don't see the points of everyone else who has actually been around to acknowledge them and you're even suggesting people to break the rules of these very forums because you think we shouldn't try to be professional."

This forum isn't a professional forum. Whatever you mean, another adjective needs to be used.

"You reasonings for things are pretty absurd and you're only really thinking about yourself instead of the entire community, which is failing and badly right now. And it won't last until something is done and that something is going to have to include a way to deal with people like you, too. You also act like you're being attacked when we're just being honest here, talking about our view on the matter and what exactly is wrong with this community"


Yes, the things I say totally benefit me. I'm thinking about myself. The "entire community" in your message is actually just people choosing to have issues with things, like you. It's sort of like offense to some things. Yes, I'm acting like I'm being attacked by simply replying to what you say to me. Unless I say "Stop attacking me/my character/etc" to something, I'm not "acting like" I'm being attacked. I'm just being honest too. I could also just claim you're acting like you're being attacked and I'm just being honest.

"Guess what .info is? A forum meant for the non-metaphysical view of tulpas. Enjoy your stay.

I always thought the sign of smartassery was the amount of bolds or all caps or other text style changes because the person can't actually emphasize their point without. Or maybe they assume others are stupid and can't read. Maybe you should go back to DeviantArt or Tumblr or whatever it is kids hugbox in these days. You don't seem like the kind of a person who can handle critique and trust me, you're going to get that here. Aaaand you don't seem to think like it's an important skill for people to learn..."

It's not meant only for that view, since there's already a board for metaphysical people, and you're not saying "this is meant for the non-metaphysical view, take it off" so don't try to argue that that's a reason they shouldn't talk about it privately.

And no, bolding is not being a smart ass. Are you serious? You're just trying to find an issue with anything I do. I can't even bold words without reading accusations of being smart ass, trying to sound intelligent, etc. You assume so much about someone's character, too. You have this caricature of me. It doesn't mean others are stupid and can't read. Just like when I edit it to make it easier to understand and for clarity, to make sure people don't skip this or that, it doesn't mean others are stupid. Apparently, even my editing doesn't do much for you since you keep not getting what I'm saying sometimes. That just encourages the editing and bolding and coloring.

I don't "seem like the kind of person who can handle critique" because I'm not silently nodding and agreeing. And no, just because I don't think there's something wrong with people talking privately online doesn't mean I think it's not an important skill to learn.

You'd be less cranky with the forums if you stopped taking issues to some things just to take issue and lay it down on someone. It's not worth the crankiness in the end.
(This post was last modified: 10-21-2013, 11:01 PM by Yori.)
10-21-2013, 10:59 PM
Find Reply
Ashmo Offline
and Bud
Registered

Posts: 636
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2013
 
RE: Q&A Moderation
Private research is a waste though because you could achieve the exact same results by documenting it separately and the private messaging your circlejerk to your special friends who you're being super secret with. Or even make your own IRC chat for that or something.

There is no reason to have private research. If you are researching, and you want to put said research on the web, on a site that is trying to be as open and transparent as possible, then you can't have a super secret cool kids club because you're afraid someone might disagree on your findings. Research is meant to be challenged anyway. Privatizing a subforum that is meant to be open so people can share ideas and learn from one another is a waste on website resources.

While private messaging is something totally different. If you want to talk to someone, just one person, and neither of you feel comfortable enough to give out private things about yourself to talk on different mediums like Facebook or Skype, you wouldn't make an entire thread to talk to them.
10-22-2013, 12:07 AM
Website Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Sponsors:
Valhal.la


Contact Us | Tulpa.Info | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication