Woo Hoo !!! ((( TM Missy 2004 )))
:bounce: Congrats on 1000 posts!!!! :bounce:
so xxdevil69 is officially a Goddess! well we knew that anyways, but least it's now official! ;)
see you saturday! and can you believe i hit my 50th post today? get that! :lol2:
neil x x x ;)
bassman
best of luck mate. take it easy. and take it from one who knows, it ain't quiet so easy to stay away goddammit! :lol2:
neil x x x ;)
well so now more and more are coming to the conclusion that there could be some other agends here?
it's already been established that The Topic is being pushed, cos ex-ops and users have said as much here that certain convos are out as far some are concerned, and T-J quoted comments that suggest that is the intention. that pushes the membership down a certain road in itself. users freedom in the room is changed. we've been arguing about that all along.
we've also been saying all along that this damages the site, and has potential to tear the site to shreds. obviously that's already happening on every level.
we've also been saying that it calls the integrity of the site into question. if it's not open and transparent, and if it can be seen in any way that there's been a touch of dishonesty here, even if it's only a little white lie, obviously that raises questions.
we're all asking the same things, and getting no answers. and i just wanna point out that every single question i've put forward on this thread has come up in convos with members. if they are asking those questions, then it's likely other users are. they deserve a public answer. if simple answers to simple questions aren't forthcoming, then more questions will be asked, and if they go off on tangents it's only cos those questions naturally arise.
even now, i still think the depth of feeling, leading to real frustration and even real anger, of LOTS of users, is bein seriously underestimated.
neil x x x ;)
i just wanna comment on the suggestion that flooding the room was done out of petulance, or arrogance . . . and on a few more recent comments.
it's been said that this is a chatroom issue, so there's no point going round the houses on forum. and forum members really have no place to make comment on it anyway.
it's been said it's up to chatroom users to decide on this themselves.
it's been said we need to talk to ops or to admin.
it's been said it's working cos people are signing up. it would appear to be a success.
it's been established by comments on this thread, that discussion of this in chat is out. it get's stamped on. i have the odd pm of chat logs from other users that show that too. we also know many room users never even look at the forums. i didn't for many months as a chat user. lots of other chat users never look here either. they won't see this discussion at all unless they are aware of it and interested.
if ops are gonna impose something, that has an element of compulsion to it, and then ask people to accept it and sign up, then surely room users need to know what they are being asked to sign up to. if there can be no debate in chat on this, then they aren't getting a free and open debate on exactly what +V might mean. it's already been said some newbies don't even know what the + is, so it is not helpful if they don't know what it is that is supposedly there to help them. i think it's been established by god knows how many members that haven't "flounced" and yet share exactly the same concerns, and argue exactly the same points, that there are some pretty big holes in this, on all kinds of levels, bringing in all kinds of issues.
there are any number of ops and ex ops on SH. some used to op SH, some have opped elsewhere. some have seen from both sides what +V can do, and what it might do, as far as splitting the room goes. it's been said already by those that this has had a negative effect at times as they have seen it elsewhere. they speak out of genuine concern on genuine issues here.
i freely admit that flooding the room was a stunt, but it was not done to flame, or show off, or show anyone up. i freely admit i was a touch angered by the non-progress of this debate despite questions raised in 900+ posts, cos this is of real concern to lots of us, who have made their anger quite clear on this thread. ban evasion means i will never now be unbanned. but at least for a few seconds everyone logged into SH was presented with at least one side of the discussion. it also meant for a few seconds that this was presented in chat as a free and open exchange of views.
i know exactly how it will be seen by many, and that means i'll be seen in a certain light because of it. we've established that on this thread since. i got a response back here fairly quickly that we have been asking for for the last 40+ pages. it shouldn't have been necessary to mount a stunt to achieve that.
neil x x x ;)
well it's been implied that i somehow have a personal crusade, am engaged in an "all about me" thing, and that i am arrogant enough to try and speak for site users? and that somehow every single idea put forward in 800+ comments was somehow wrong because of that. and that cos i was putting forward complaints that others have made here, then somehow all the points others have raised here should be dismissed cos i can be dismissed like that.
the whole point of this, is that verification is purely an op tool. it was voted in by ops and admin can only be an op so can noone see why that looks wrong? and i'm not saying that is the intention, but +V will have applications once it's in place.
the application of +V, even if it's not used, is to police the room in some way, cos those with a + won't want to lose it, and those without it will want to have it, and so it is in effect a way to control the room members. it's not about saying who's genuine at all, cos if it was, the systems would look very different. it is that there is an element of compulsion here that we object to it on priciple.
the purpose of of it still hasn't been explained, and it's at the expense of others who will lose out. others will lose something from the site that we take for granted. they will find it harder to click with what will be a clique.
it took some daft stunts from me and push after push, but we still haven't seen how this helps anyone? and some people are relly disturbed by it, as can be seen by the mass of comments made by others than myself.
we're saying it'son trial to see if it's successful. well since people are saying they don't like the idea, but better have it and sign up cos we have it, can you not see how that in itself has an element of compulsion to it, let alone that it was brought in solely by ops? and obviously it will be claimed to be successful cos people sign up even against their better judgement if they object to it on priciple but accept it in practicality.
it's been admitted the vote wasn't unanimous, so some ops clearly weren't in favour, and some ops no doubt had their objections overcome and they went for it? all we're asking, and i dunno why it's taken this much, is what are the benefits then that so outweigh problem after problem?
chatroom users have already proved why it's wrong, cos the've proved it does make a difference to the room, and made that obvious here..
why did it take some that amount of pushing, and some daft stunts, that i know full well has put me in a bad light to get a simple explanation of where we're going with this? what is the problem that this provides any kind of solution to, and yet splits the site?
neil x x x ;)
ok steve, so you had your own objections to start with but must have found reasons to change your mind?
that's pretty much all we've been after. with all the objections, what compelling reason is there for +V.
neil x x x
i've thought long and hard about what follows on this post, cos i've been very, very reluctant to fire this particular bullet. i want to make it clear i am not suggesting that what follows is the intention of anyone here! but it's been asked by ops, so now i'll tell you!
let me say that again . . a bit louder . .
i am ***NOT*** suggesting ***for one minute*** that what follows is the intention of anyone here!
i am merely stating that what follows exists in possibility.
technical shit first. . .
your status as a "Verified Genuine Swinger" is being denoted using the Voice command. ((( +V )))
when you enter the room to find a + beside your nick, you are being Auto-Voiced from a database. that is to say, the Voice command is being run automatically from a database that assigns +V to a "Verified Genuine Swinger"
Practical application of +V ((( Voice ))) in +M ((( Moderated ))) chatrooms
It is possible to set the SH chatroom Channel Mode to +M ((( Moderated ))) at present it is not.
with a +M channel mode, only those with a +V can speak in channel. hence Voice.
with a big enough database of +V users, it is feasible to reduce the chatroom to "Verified Genuine Swinger" with a simple tweak of Channel Mode to +M
other users can still log in and watch the room, but they cannot contribute to it.
in order for them to contribute they would have to have +V ((( Voice )) awarded.
chatroom verification can only be assigned on recommendation by another +V user. i.e. an existing +V member would have to apply on your behalf to have you assigned +V status before you could contribute to the room.
now let me say it again . . .
i am ***NOT*** suggesting ***for one minute*** that what follows is the intention of anyone here!
but the mere possibility that such a course of action would actually be feasible at some point, and ***could*** be contemplated, is IMO more than adequate reason to kill this.
i await a deconstruction of why my argument is technically inaccurate. i believe it is possible, given a fair amount of research.
neil x x x ;)
steve
i hope people take me seriously because every single argument i have made can be seen by anyone who actually reads the thread to be a serious, well thought out one, that is based in fact, and real belief that this changes everything the site has previously been about!
dismissing me as a flouncer is no argument! i have come back cos this is wrong! all my posts are on this thread, not cos i need to come back, cos i simply don't? the site has served it's purpose for me. for that i am immensely grateful! that the purpose of the site as i see it could be denied to others is my concern, pure and simple? how many times do i need to say that? you and i both know what +V does!
yes steve i know damn well posting an essay into channel will get me akicked. i did it before knowing that and requested it. i did it again knowing full well that ban evasion will likely result in an attempt to Kline me. i do not care about my status as a site member over this, but i do care about the status of other site members who do not know what i know, and most likely never will given the implications of +V?
i know that! and knowing that i fully took a full deactivation from this site upon myself, not cos of a personal crusade, or because i have a personal axe to grind, as my arguments make clear, but out of real passion that this is simply arguments are the same as many on this thread? you cannt dismiss them quite so easily?
maybe you'd like to use the same argument against the mods who have been flamed on this very thread? i ain't the only one on this thread to say what i've had to say?. in fact i've made about 25 posts out of 700'ish? it is wrong steve! and if you don't know that i have no personal axe to grind then i . . . well . . . i simply dunno? we opped together? we have done munches together? you know me to be gen? so all my arguments are suddenly false?
would you like to dismiss the entire thread or can ***all*** of us raising the same issues to protect what we believe to be the ethos of SH have some answers?
deactivate away?
n x x x ;)
OPS . . .
how much further down this line do you want us to go?
ADMIN HAS TO BE AN OP!
quite a few of us with an ounce of intelligence have worked that out by the arguments on this thread!
ADMIN IS NOT . . . .
Mark . . . too open to abuse . . he'd never do it!
Steve_d / Debs_uk . . . likewise . . IRCops . . too much power to abuse!
Steve_g . . . i sincerely hope i know him better than that!
it ain't Level 8! that won't work! i checked that for 2 days to make sure! i trawled IRC sites to work that out, and most of you are out! it takes level 10!
ADMIN IS . . . .
i ain't feckin' saying ok! but there ain't that many names left!
kill it! what do you want me to do?
the cannon i have to shoot you down is here! i *** do not *** wanna load that particular gun, but i have the bullets in my hand ok? naming names out of 4 or 5 of you to prove you lied. +V in +M. if you don't want the mere suggestion of it kill +V! :mad:
n x x x
ok we've been going round the houses nit-picking and poking holes and going off into vaguer and vaguer territory to try and show just how far reaching the possible implications of +V are. we have hopefully demonstrated by now exactly where the problems lie with +V, in all kinds of practical and theoretical ways.
it's far too late to play the peacemaker now, cos i well understand how some would see me as having an axe to grind, and so might just say pretty much every argument i've made has been an attack on them personally. that could not be further from the truth, but i'm gonna make an open apology to those who i suspect have taken offence. i have put the opinion of those i always got on with on the line to make my case. every single statement i've made has been based on real beliefs, and as far as i can possibly tell, is grounded in fact!
i best apologise now cos i'm about to do it again.
the people who have mainly been continuing this little row, for the last 15 pages or so at least, are largely mods ((( 3 or 4 ))) ex ops ((( 4 or 5 ))) and long standing, well respected, members of this site ((( loads ))) who have between them made massive contributions in terms of time and effort out of love for SH.
i think it's fair to say, without seeming too arrogant, that we truly understand the mechanics of SH, on many levels, because we have seen it from all angles, inside and out. i know that the ops who made this decision understand those same things.
given that that's the case, i have to conclude that those proponents of +V know full well that there are massive problems with this sytem. i also know they know full well what it's possible effect on the site could be. i am forced to question the intention of +V.
i have to conclude then that this is an opping decision, and the benefits of this sytem relate purely to opping SH, to the detriment of the site and it's users.
it has nothing to do with helping newbies as has been stated. it is pure and simple an opping tool, to police the chatroom in some way. that is one of my major concerns. it adds an extra dimension to opping powers, which is unneccessary because ops already have all the necessary tools ((( +R, Akick, Ban, Kick, Warn, Advise ))) and yet it detracts in huge ways from the site itself. it is easy to see why ops might vote for a system that increases their powers.
i'm not even go down the road of suggesting practical applications of +V for ops depending on Channel Mode cos i think that would be seen to be grossly unfair. i'm prepared to risk that though if that's what it takes to protect the fairness of SH.
i also have to conclude that Admin could only be an Op, otherwise the system is completely unworkable, and raises all kinds of questions. that has been consistently denied.
while i understand full well why Admin would wish to remain anonymous, the fact that they have chosen to issue that denial, rather than just remain silent on that particular issue, as they have remained silent on every other issue, calls the integrity of their statements into question. that is deeply regrettable.
after trawling the IRC forums plastered all over the net, to check i fully understand the mechanics of implementing +V, i have to conclude that Admin can only be an Op, and i also have to conclude with some educated guesswork that Admin could only be one of half a dozen or so people. i don't wanna push that button either, cos that too would be seen to be grossly unfair of me.
take off the +V and rethink it, or come here to explain it! please.
neil x x x ;)
oh and fred you asked about logs.
yep. every single comment, script, command executed is logged and indicated in some way. all ops keep logs of every single channel they are opped up in. that includes ops channel, main room, and even personal PM's, cos you need to be able to validate any decision made if a complaint arises, or risk being deopped.
neil x x x ;)
:smackbottom:
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: 
really? and i was just sooooooo proud of me little self too! :cry: :cry: :cry:
:lol2:
ops: :oops: Sorry, it's jus the idea of fried penises seems strangely tempting - especially when such bollox is being written here. Can someone get me a recipe for fried balls too?? 
and vodka jelly all round! 
i'm still playing catch up on this thread, but . . . 
