RE: moderation interpretation?

RE: moderation interpretation? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

VaguelyCurious -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:27:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I would have spelled it nonsense, it would have been ever so much more thoughtful coming from me, then. Everything you do and say is thoughtful, Ron. Even if the only thing it's full of thoughts about is blowjobs.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:28:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popularDemand possession is nine tenths of the law Innit. Which is why, unless needles is gonna get a flashlight and a balaclava and break into wherever CM's servers are, no thread will ever be hers.

popularDemand -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:30:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious quote: ORIGINAL: popularDemand possession is nine tenths of the law Innit. Which is why, unless needles is gonna get a flashlight and a balaclava and break into wherever CM's servers are, no thread will ever be hers. been there, done that. pD

needlesandpins -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:30:20 PM)
it's context, blimey people, it really is very simple. i don't care what anything of the site says because in my everyday language i will still refer to something that i start as mine, because I started it. it cm wish to claim ownership then cool. that doesn't stop me refering to it as mine rather than just the title of the thread. picky is as picky does. needles

juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:30:33 PM)
Its mine I tell ya, its all mine... get ur asses off my thread!

RedMagic1 -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:31:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather Well, speaking as one cuntlicker to another, the Moderators already make judgments about what is and what isn't a "personal attack", I just think they should be less lenient when the potential attack is using the target's sexual practices. Heather, you might reconsider your position against the occasionally proposed "Lgbt lifestyles" board. While there are general rules sitewide, emphasis in enforcement varies from board to board. Like politics, the Gorean board is modded differently from the rest of the site, as is Ask a Mistress, though in a different way. If you started a thread there, asking, "what is your favorite recipe for teacakes?" my guess is that it would stay there and not get moved. Normally such a thread would end up in OT, but the mods lean toward allowing femdoms to having their own discussion corner, and only the wank threads are moved out (or not...).

VaguelyCurious -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:31:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins it's context, blimey people, it really is very simple. i don't care what anything of the site says because in my everyday language i will still refer to something that i start as mine, because I started it. it cm wish to claim ownership then cool. that doesn't stop me refering to it as mine rather than just the title of the thread. ...so if I start referring to you as my needles that means you're actually mine, and if anyone points out that this is bullshit they're just being picky? That's cool, my needles.

RapierFugue -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:35:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins it's context, blimey people, it really is very simple. i don't care what anything of the site says because in my everyday language i will still refer to something that i start as mine, because I started it. it cm wish to claim ownership then cool. that doesn't stop me refering to it as mine rather than just the title of the thread. It's got fuck-all to do with "context". You can refer to black as white. Doesn't make you correct. If you're going to try and converse with others in English, it helps not to try to rename everything to words you like, or which suit you. You calling it "yours" doesn't make it yours. So, you can either a) pretend it is, use language suggesting it is, and generally make a fool of yourself or b) give the thing its proper name - it's A thread, not YOUR thread. You want to rename it a banana, you go ahead. Just don't be surprised when people start pointing and laughing.

juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:36:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins it's context, blimey people, it really is very simple. i don't care what anything of the site says because in my everyday language i will still refer to something that i start as mine, because I started it. it cm wish to claim ownership then cool. that doesn't stop me refering to it as mine rather than just the title of the thread. picky is as picky does. needles Beyond all of the legalities, the known common ideas of "public forum"... thinking of a thread as "mine" because I started it would be extraordinarily limited way of viewing a conversation. I can say I had a conversation with someone, I never have thought of it as "owning" the conversation. I share conversation, I do not own it. You have a person who initiates a conversation, and then you have others who contribute to it, and all of these have technical academic terms when looking at language (I loved my linguistic training), but I do not think I have ever heard of a conversation in terms of ownership A thread is a conversation between people, basically. collarme owns the venue where the conversation takes place. Think of it as a video taping of a physical location... just because you trained a collarme camera on a conversation you were having with someone doesn't give you ownership of the security tape at a venue... Hope that was helpful

ModTwentyOne -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:37:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins however, i can claim ownership of a thread if i start it, it's mine. if someone else starts a thread then they are the op and the thread is their's. context is everything. I'll refer you back to my first post in this thread, where I said, "The person who starts a thread does not own the thread, and doesn't get to make up rules as to how people post or what is on topic or not. They also don't get to police the thread, telling others to stay on topic, as that is in itself, off topic. " You can love it and keep it and call it George if you want; doesn't make it truly yours. Mod21

RedMagic1 -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:37:32 PM)
I think disenskulling people gets you wet.

needlesandpins -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:37:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins it's context, blimey people, it really is very simple. i don't care what anything of the site says because in my everyday language i will still refer to something that i start as mine, because I started it. it cm wish to claim ownership then cool. that doesn't stop me refering to it as mine rather than just the title of the thread. ...so if I start referring to you as my needles that means you're actually mine, and if anyone points out that this is bullshit they're just being picky? That's cool, my needles. it's not like i'm claiming copyright or anything. but should you care to go back through the pages of this thread you will find that someone said 'i was glad to see Heather's thread come back' that implies ownership in exactly the same context as i have been using it. you can try and claim me all you like but i'm bloody expencive to keep. needles

juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:39:38 PM)
Back to my last question, can you own a conversation, or is it something you share with others?

RapierFugue -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:39:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins it's not like i'm claiming copyright or anything. but should you care to go back through the pages of this thread you will find that someone said 'i was glad to see Heather's thread come back' that implies ownership in exactly the same context as i have been using it. And they were wrong, as was she. As are you.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:40:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 I think disenskulling people gets you wet. Nah. Accuracy, not disenskulling. Nice word, though. :p

needlesandpins -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:40:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ModTwentyOne quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins however, i can claim ownership of a thread if i start it, it's mine. if someone else starts a thread then they are the op and the thread is their's. context is everything. I'll refer you back to my first post in this thread, where I said, "The person who starts a thread does not own the thread, and doesn't get to make up rules as to how people post or what is on topic or not. They also don't get to police the thread, telling others to stay on topic, as that is in itself, off topic. " You can love it and keep it and call it George if you want; doesn't make it truly yours. Mod21 i am not claiming ownership as in this bit of of the site as in pack it up and take it away. it's just me refering to something i started as oposed to someone else starting it. therefore my thread and not someone elses. needles

RapierFugue -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:41:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins i am not claiming ownership as in this bit of of the site as in pack it up and take it away. it's just me refering to something i started as oposed to someone else starting it. therefore my thread and not someone elses. "I say it is ... all the other captains say it isn't".

RedMagic1 -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:42:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 I think disenskulling people gets you wet. Nah. Accuracy, not disenskulling. Nice word, though. :p I totally relate. Accuracy people get me hard as a rock.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:42:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins it's not like i'm claiming copyright or anything. but should you care to go back through the pages of this thread you will find that someone said 'i was glad to see Heather's thread come back' that implies ownership in exactly the same context as i have been using it. You weren't claiming copyright, no. But you were saying to the beardy one whose name I can't remember that since a thread is yours you're more entitled to get shirty with the mods (and with him) about it being moderated. Which is bullshit. And like RF said - someone else saying something doesn't actually make it right. And putting the word context in really big letters doesn't do anything much either.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/20/2011 4:43:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 I totally relate. Accuracy people get me hard as a rock. [:D][:D][:D]

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875