The Year In Pictures: SuperGonzo 2009 Edition

[Barry]

Originally Posted by SuperGonzo

By the way. . .still can't Photoshop my picture into anything.

Sure I can. I'll make a new one, register on your piece of shit website, and post it THERE instead. Now that your sig is gone why don't you tell us about "pwned" again?

Originally Posted by jimbocat

Can't do.....it can't be changed.......try to change yours.........

Mine was a request. If you're saying I don't have the ability to change it I'll take your word for it, but someone can change the Michelin Man's for him.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by SuperGonzo

By the way. . .still can't Photoshop my picture into anything.

Can't take shit in a smack forum SuperPussy?

[zod]

Originally Posted by Bavarian

Zod, remove your signature pic or be banned.

Isn't this fun?
http://www.zbud.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic57_3.gif

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Reductio ad absurdum

[Bavarian]

I'm just messing around.
Wanted to show that consistancy is not always the way to run this dump.

Sig pics are only frowned upon in the Game Day Live threads, slows things down.

[zod]

Originally Posted by Bavarian

I'm just messing around.

I understood that, so was I. See how easy it is to turn a small thing into a large thing. And a little part of me wanted to make you run me from a smack forum without talking politics, using the forbidden words or the photoshop taboo.

Give Weedsie a kiss for me!


Nota bene: It's zod with a little z.

Now get that avatar thingy working

[kainen]

BAV!!! check the test site...follow directions.


LOL

[weeds]

Originally Posted by zod

Give Weedsie a kiss for me!

I've got something white and pasty for ya...

[zod]

Originally Posted by weeds

I've got something white and pasty for ya...

Promises, promises! Always these promises.

[weeds]

Sorry....

I recognize this is a hot button issue, zod. (Notice I used a lower-case 'z'?)
All of you, I do recognize this. You all need to recognize that with an absentee owner, we're (meaning the SuperMods) at a distinct disadvantage. We'll make decisions by committee and on a consensus basis. It ain't pretty, I'll grant you that...nor will the end result be what any particular individual wants to hear ... but, that'll be it.

[Galileo]

Originally Posted by weeds

All of you, I do recognize this. You all need to recognize that with an absentee owner, we're (meaning the SuperMods) at a distinct disadvantage. We'll make decisions by committee and on a consensus basis.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, and that is what you are doing. The chief complaint about the moderation of this site FOR YEARS has been that it is arbitrary and it takes sides. If you're on the "right" side you're given considerably more leeway than if you're on the "wrong" side. Additionally, the antagonists are treated less harshly than the people who retaliate......kind of like in the NBA where the ref doesn't see the first foul but sees the retaliation foul and calls it. The difference is, of course, that it's all here in black and white and it's easy to go back and see who committed the first foul.

The SuperMods can continue to make consensus, committee decisions on an arbitrary basis and keep us guessing as to what side of the issue we need to be on in order to get leeway. I mean, it's worked so freakin' well up to this point that you might as well stick with it.

OR....you could try it the way our nation's Founding Fathers did it. Write down some rules and follow them, even when you'd rather not. That's all I'm asking. I mean, I think it's freakin' nuts the shit that Champ and SuperGonzo get away with. I've been totally exasperated in the past with the taunting that goes on.

This is unsolicted advice and given the past history here I don't expect it will be received well or considered at all but at least it's on the record. If it were up to me, this is what I'd do.

1) Erase the past. There's a lot of stuff that has built up over the years and so an innocuous statement like "Flynn looked good on that play" is interpreted as being part of a poster's pro/anti agenda regarding Favre, TT, or Aaron Rodgers. This stuff needs to stop and it needs to stop abruptly. Past is past and it's over. That doesn't mean we should never be able to refer to what the team has done in the past but it does mean that we shouldn't use a poster's past statements to bludgeon them.

2) Stop the taunting. It's a 15 yard penalty in the NFL. Here, it rarely results in even a warning. This should stop.

3) Get rid of the Sidelines and Smackdown Hotel. Y'all seem to think that somehow we can insult the living shit out of each other in this forum and that it won't spill over to the football forums. That's as nutty as thinking you and your family can insult the shit out of each other in one room of the house and then forget about it in the next. Have one standard and enforce it in every forum.

4) Write some rules down and enforce them. As a former schoolteacher, we were told to make five rules for our classroom and enforce them . More than five and nobody can remember them. So pick five and enforce them uniformly. I would suggest very strongly that "no taunting" be one of them.

5) Have realistic consequences. People like Iconoclast, Mr. Radio, TRK have all been "banned" without ever having even received a timeout. I'd suggest a sliding scale.....two days, a week, two weeks, a month, three months, etc.

6) As Mods, you guys have to stop saying shit like "I don't give a crap what you think and I don't owe you any explanation". I don't see how that's productive at all and it certainly sends a message that our views are irrelevant and that this is your exclusive sandbox and that's pretty offensive, IMO.

So there it is. I've said my two cents. As I've said, I don't expect this will amount to squat based on past experience. But I know it's possible to run a forum without this constant bickering .

Stop taking sides and making arbitrary, consensus decrees and post some freakin' rules and enforce them. If the rule is "no profanity", then when somebody says "No shit" give them a two day timeout. If the rule is "no profanity directed at another person" then when somebody says "you are full of shit" give them a timeout.

IMO, you've got about 4 guys here who are responsible directly or indirectly for about 85% of the discord. Tell them via PM that they can't hide behind your skirts anymore and that they'll be consequenced for infractions and everybody's life will be a lot easier.

I'm done.

[jimbocat]

In a perfect world that sounds real good Galileo, but the few rules that are in place keep getting pushed to the limits, resulting in frustration for both the mods and posters. I know, I posted a few simple "rules" regarding the pro/con Farve topic a few months ago and it escalated into a GB "Farve lynching".....if I had given everyone a TO that broke the "rules", there would have been a lot less posters in the GB forum....we could care less what Farve did as a GB player, all we'd like to discuss is Farve as a Viking.

Define "Smack"......a lot easier said than done.......one poster's wisecrack, is another poster's "smack"....is it a poster from another forum spamming your board with a "Gameday thread"????.....technically it's OK, but we all know the real intentions behind such a great gesture....on and on....pushing and pushing.....

....And since you brought up two posters by name, let me answer for them....
SG rarely, if ever, posts outside the Viking forum, except for the "Smack" forums....

Champ's posts are fact based, therefore I'd call them more intimidating than taunting......I don't read all the posts, but I've never seen him call someone a name, swear, or use abusive language unless attacked first, and even then, rarely....

I'm with Weeds, and it really hurts me to say that , .....we're doing the best we can.....

I'm assuming everyone here is an adult.......we wouldn't need the "rules" if everyone acted like one.........

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by jimbocat

Champ's posts are fact based

Post of the decade!

[Galileo]

Originally Posted by jimbocat

In a perfect world that sounds real good Galileo, but the few rules that are in place keep getting pushed to the limits, resulting in frustration for both the mods and posters. I know, I posted a few simple "rules" regarding the pro/con Farve topic

The problem there was that you just came out and decreed. People rebelled. You can't rule by decree. Sit down and think for a while, Jimbocat, consult with the other mods, decide what the rules are going to be, tell the other posters here what the rules are going to be..AND WHY.... and then stick to your guns.


It's actually helpful if the rules make sense. For example, "it's OK to insult the living shit out of somebody but if they post a picture of themselves on the internet it's not OK to use it" makes absolutely no sense to me or quite a few of the other posters. I mean, what's the rationale on that?

Champ's posts are fact based,

You know what? My turds are food-based but I'm pretty sure that most people wouldn't confuse one of my toilet cloggers with a beef burrito or chocolate eclair. To dismiss his taunting, truth-twisting, bullshit as "fact-based" is pretty clear evidence to me that you're not well-suited for the job of moderating. Apples are good to eat but horse apples are not and there's a difference between snow and yellow snow and if you don't understand that and just say "Well, it's all snow" then it's pretty clear your ability to make rational discriminations is pretty impaired.

technically it's OK, but we all know the real intentions

No. We don't. We may THINK we know intentions, but we don't. That's why people are held accountable for what they do, not what their intentions are. If I go into a convenience store with a gun, pull it on the clerk, and rob him then that's what I did. But did I intend to scare him with that gun? Did it go off by accident? Did I intend to shoot him?

Nobody knows that except me and that's why at the trial I'll be arraigned for what I did: I carried a loaded weapon, used it in the commission of a crime, and shot a person. That's what I'll be tried for, not for what I intended. If intentions are what mattered no drunk driver would ever be on trial for an accident he didn't intend to have.

but I've never seen him (Champ) call someone a name, swear, or use abusive language unless attacked first, and even then, rarely

Missing the point. Let's say I go downtown San Antonio and stand at the corner of Martin Luther King Avenue and Rosa Parks Boulevard and start trying to pass out KKK literature and preaching on what a philandering hypocrite MLK was. Even if I'm wearing a suit and a tie and using polite language.....and using facts to support my argument......I'm clearly trying to provoke shit. How long do you think the police would let me do that without intervening? Do you think it's possible I might get a citation for creating a disturbance?

It's not what he does. It's the context and the way he does it. And again, that's been pretty apparent at every forum he's ever been in. He enjoys doing this and you guys give him the opportunity to do it.

You said we're adults here. Use your adult judgement. Apply some rational thought here. I know I'm not the smartest guy here by a long shot but it's apparent even to me. And when poster after poster after poster comes to my site with the same complaints and naming the same names I'd have to be pretty hard-headed to insist that they're all wrong.

[weeds]

Well... we are. Sorry if you're displeased.

[zod]

Originally Posted by weeds

Sorry....

I recognize this is a hot button issue, zod. (Notice I used a lower-case 'z'?)
All of you, I do recognize this. You all need to recognize that with an absentee owner, we're (meaning the SuperMods) at a distinct disadvantage. We'll make decisions by committee and on a consensus basis. It ain't pretty, I'll grant you that...nor will the end result be what any particular individual wants to hear ... but, that'll be it.

Oh, weedise you're my hero! I just love it when you exhibit leadership!

Now, about that offer to buy the site. It sounds like you would like some of that ownership stuff.

[weeds]

Oh zoddie, you silver tongued, wascally wabbit yoooooo..... you just know that I love it when you talk shhhhuuuugga, to me.

I seem to have missed the "offer" to which you refer.

[BTP]

Originally Posted by jimbocat

I
Champ's posts are fact based

bwahahah, no wait Bwahahaha Thanks for the phucking laugh Jimbo.


p.s. You're truly phucking clueless if you really typed that with a straight face. 'cause let me tell you that comment there of yours is oozing full of shit.

[Debaser]

Oh look, SuperFatzo called the Super Bowl dead nuts on!

Originally Posted by SuperGonzo

If the Saints play against the Colts the way they did against us, they lose by three touchdowns, at least.

Manning and the Colts aren't going to be turning the ball over five times, I don't think.

Seriously, if you force five turnovers in a game and you still require a field goal in overtime. . .at home. . .to win? Yeah, Indy is going to roll that team.

The only rolling going on is SuperFatzo's belly as he jams another bag of cheetos down is maw.

[Bavarian]

Originally Posted by Galileo

The SuperMods can continue to make consensus, committee decisions on an arbitrary basis and keep us guessing as to what side of the issue we need to be on in order to get leeway.

Understand what you're getting at. Private message en route.