QueenZone discussion #600355

<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote: I second this. Plus, I nominate Dudley for getting shot dead.

DudleyFufkin wrote: "What do you mean islam is harmless? are you kidding? its the most dangerous thing in the world and should be banned. if people want to be islam, then they can go and live in an arab country. problem solved. There will be no terrorism in uk then, well, only the irish probably, and at least they have the courtesy to warn us" Whats racist about this????!?!?!!???

Mr.Jingles wrote: I know!! Isn't this outrageous??!! I can't even wear my Ku Klux Klan costume outside my house without being told a bunch of obscenities by people.

DudleyFufkin wrote: you cant even call asian police officers "pakis" anymore, they arrest you. This country.

DudleyFufkin wrote: "What do you mean islam is harmless? are you kidding? its the most dangerous thing in the world and should be banned. if people want to be islam, then they can go and live in an arab country. problem solved. There will be no terrorism in uk then, well, only the irish probably, and at least they have the courtesy to warn us" Whats racist about this????!?!?!!???

DudleyFufkin wrote: God, you've got one hell of a chip on your shoulder. Chill man / woman, actually, your probably a woman, they always over react with stuff like this.

YourValentine wrote: Last week an idiot called Sue Allen something posted a fake "Reuters news item" about John Deacon's alleged death. Incredibly cruel and thoughtless. I deleted the poster and several new accounts but s/he came back with another account and has a thread in the personal forum with 46 replies. Her/his sig says: cast the first stone, Orchard.

3* taylorgaga (Begg) wrote: what about reporting the IP address, that can be done and if done properly i believe that particular user of the IP address can be fined and be banned from internet access for improper use and for abusing the internet, also for causing harm to those with all the rasist comments seen recently? is that not at all possible, or worth a try?

<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote: I second this. Plus, I nominate Dudley for getting shot dead.

whirled peas<br><font size=1>Give peas a chance wrote: Check out this guy with a huge cock! link

Erin wrote:

DudleyFufkin wrote: God, you've got one hell of a chip on your shoulder. Chill man / woman, actually, your probably a woman, they always over react with stuff like this.

a sexist too? *lol* Oh yeah..we only overreact during "that time of the month"...

Bryans Permed Poodle wrote:

Erin wrote:

DudleyFufkin wrote: God, you've got one hell of a chip on your shoulder. Chill man / woman, actually, your probably a woman, they always over react with stuff like this.

a sexist too? *lol* Oh yeah..we only overreact during "that time of the month"...

Problem is "that time of the month" is usually the "whole fuckin month"

Guy wrote:

3* taylorgaga (Begg) wrote: what about reporting the IP address, that can be done and if done properly i believe that particular user of the IP address can be fined and be banned from internet access for improper use and for abusing the internet, also for causing harm to those with all the rasist comments seen recently? is that not at all possible, or worth a try?

No, it's not possible, now cut the bullshit and just ignore the assholes!

Sir Archie 'Tiffany' Leach wrote: Typical lefties. Always wanting intervention. If you don't like it don't read it, don't visit Queenzone or start your own site where you can ban every tosser to your heart's content.

Erin wrote:

YourValentine wrote: Last week an idiot called Sue Allen something posted a fake "Reuters news item" about John Deacon's alleged death. Incredibly cruel and thoughtless. I deleted the poster and several new accounts but s/he came back with another account and has a thread in the personal forum with 46 replies. Her/his sig says: cast the first stone, Orchard.

Ahhh..so THAT is what that sig is all about.... I missed that John thread entirely.

Lisser wrote:

Guy wrote:

3* taylorgaga (Begg) wrote: what about reporting the IP address, that can be done and if done properly i believe that particular user of the IP address can be fined and be banned from internet access for improper use and for abusing the internet, also for causing harm to those with all the rasist comments seen recently? is that not at all possible, or worth a try?

No, it's not possible, now cut the bullshit and just ignore the assholes!

Amen!!!

Rip Van Winkle wrote:

Lisser wrote:

Guy wrote:

3* taylorgaga (Begg) wrote: what about reporting the IP address, that can be done and if done properly i believe that particular user of the IP address can be fined and be banned from internet access for improper use and for abusing the internet, also for causing harm to those with all the rasist comments seen recently? is that not at all possible, or worth a try?

No, it's not possible, now cut the bullshit and just ignore the assholes!

Amen!!!

...and another Amen. Queenonline has moderation ... and power corrupts their moderators. I can ignore the wind-up merchants and the whiners, but moderation would be the final death knell for Queenzone.

Mr.Jingles wrote:

Erin wrote:

YourValentine wrote: Last week an idiot called Sue Allen something posted a fake "Reuters news item" about John Deacon's alleged death. Incredibly cruel and thoughtless. I deleted the poster and several new accounts but s/he came back with another account and has a thread in the personal forum with 46 replies. Her/his sig says: cast the first stone, Orchard.

Ahhh..so THAT is what that sig is all about.... I missed that John thread entirely.

But John Deacon's dead!! Didn't you know that?? Last year he got beaten up to death by his wife Veronica after she started surfing Queenzone and found those pictures of John at a strip club. The mad woman won't even allow this poor man to have a little lap dance, and now he's dead because all he wanted was to grab a nicely shaped pair of tities that unfortunatelty his wife no longer had. R.I.P. - John 'Deacy' Deacon (1949-2004).

Ian R wrote: I see that all those saying 'Amen' are quite willing to see QueenZone being dragged into the 10th level of shitiness. The problem iwith Moderation is NOT the principle of it alone, but the lottery of having a decent moderator. QueenOnline may well be over-moderated, but I don't see any reason why QueenZone shouldn't have something called 'standards'. I belong to several other message boards that are very sensibly moderated - it could happen here too. Only the racist fuckwits need worry about being censored.

On the contrary. This board does not, should not ever, and has never needed babysitters

It would be ideal if every poster had some self control and posted useful, interesting information. It would also be ideal if we all could learn to skip over the things we don't care to read about from posters that are known to post garbage.

If a poster that doesn't already have a reputation for posting nonsense posts something that you don't happen to agree with and would like to comment on, by all means....have a debate! But don't feed into someone's cries for attention, get yourself bent out of shape in the process then announce you are leaving QZ. Don't leave...stay and ignore their crap posts.

Say you go to a book store to buy a cookbook bc you are interested in cooking. You already know you can't stand self-help books. Do you skip the self-help section and go to the cooking section bc you already know that is what you are interested in or do you go to the self-help section to spend your whole experience at the store in the self-help section yelling to the store manager that this section should not be allowed in the store? What I'm trying to get at is we all don't agree on what is acceptable on here and what isn't but the fact is is that this board is unmoderated. This means we are free to chose what we want to write on here and we are free to choose what we want to read on here

QZ is not a utopia and neither is the real world.

I've said this before, this board is what we make of it. If you want a nice place to discuss Queen, get cool concerts, make new friends, etc. then DO THAT. If you want to yell to Barb every time someone posts something that you don't agree with, you are wasting a lot of your own time as well as Barb's.

If you don't like it, just skip over it.

YourValentine wrote: It's worth to make a little effort to make the board a better place. It's easy. Just look at the interesting topics that drop down the page like a stone and on the other side all the sutpid threads getting loads of replies.

Fenderek wrote:

YourValentine wrote: It's worth to make a little effort to make the board a better place. It's easy. Just look at the interesting topics that drop down the page like a stone and on the other side all the sutpid threads getting loads of replies.

HERE, HERE- 100% RIGHT. Just look at "Freddie was not so great" thread- six pages of replies!!!! And than ppl complain that we have crap on this board- but by all those replies, written by those "offended" the thread was/is being kept alive and on tp of the list... We decide what's being talked about- if someone posts something stupid and everybody will ignore it- no-one will know about it, it'll disappear ina week. Someone may innitaiate stir up, but there's two to tango- endless "yeah, I agree- we should ban him" keeps every single thread and problem very much alive...

whirled peas<br><font size=1>Give peas a chance wrote: This reminds me.. I left before the election. I wonder how well Charles Baer did?

Mr.Jingles wrote: If we should pretty much allow anyone to post whatever they want then let's welcome Jake Britt back.

Fenderek wrote: OK- tell me WHO would taht be...? Richard and Barb are already doing a lot to keep it "sane". Who else do you think could?

Krizzy wrote: I agree a moderator is needed since the board is becoming more offensive and less informative. The posters who are starting up are very young and these childish posts are starting to lose QZ members.

<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote: Well, my dear pseudo-liberals (in the right-winged sense), such as Lisser and 'Sir' Archie: this is not an ideal board, not everyone has self-control, so I say SENSIBLE moderation is a good idea. Richard and YV have had moderator-functions for as long as I know, but they have been (understandably) cautious in using them. The only thing I and the other 'lefties', as our elitist immitation-noble Archie called us, want to make clear is that we want Richard and YV to use their powers a bit more freely. This is not QOL, and comparing possible moderation on this board with the power-abuse on QOL is quite frankly an insult to Richard and YV, as it shows a lack of trust in them. I'm quite sure they will not abuse their power, and I don't think we would need more moderators (unless Richard and YV think so, and in which case reliable and respectable QZ-ers who already have a natural authority would be chosen (and I do NOT consider myself part of that group, ok?!)), so there shouldn't be a problem. The problem with your reactionary view is exactly what is the problem with the entire conservative view: you are not willing to take a chance to make something 'good' if you think that the current state is 'sufficient'.

PieterMC wrote:

Krizzy wrote: I agree a moderator is needed since the board is becoming more offensive and less informative. The posters who are starting up are very young and these childish posts are starting to lose QZ members.

The site has several moderators, just that people complain if they ever use their power. Of course people complain if they don't use it. I remember back in the day, when I removed a certain user from the website after receiving god knows how many complaints about them. There will be some people who will remember. Anyhoooo I banned them and all hell broke loose. You would think I had just killed somebody.

Lisser wrote: What if Barb deletes a thread considered to be offensive to you but is something I've been looking for information on?

PieterMC wrote: There have always been idiots that post crap here, always will be. However it's getting worse and worse and happening more often. The idea of just ignoring them is great, but it's just not going to happen. People will always reply no matter how often people say just ignore it. I have been here since 1997 and people said ignore it then, and 8 years later people are still saying the same thing. The fact is some things just need to be deleted, that does not mean the person needs to be instantly banned, but some posts should not be allowed.

Lisser wrote: I do agree with you Pieter but somehow I think that if threads start being deleted, it becomes a game to poster that starts them. They just keep posting over and over again so they occupy all of your time.

PieterMC wrote:

Lisser wrote: What if Barb deletes a thread considered to be offensive to you but is something I've been looking for information on?

I think what most people who want some form of moderation are looking for are topics that contain racist comments and sexually explicit links to be removed. They don't belong on Queenzone. Word to yer momma... WORD UP!!

YourValentine wrote: On QOL they "quarantine" messages and the admins look into it before deleting - what a ridiculous system. But then it's the official EMI website and they need more control.

Rip Van Winkle wrote: Any strict moderator, even Barb or Richard if they became babysitters, would eventually succomb to being censors to some extent ... because power corrupts.

Rip Van Winkle wrote: I recall Haole being banned. The people that wanted his head were the prissy Queen Forever types that had no sense of humor.I Concerning censorship, after Haole was banned, a several page reactionary topic to Haole's banning was suddenly closed (no viewing or additional posts allowed) just before Richard's return (fom vacation?). A moderator on Queenzone censored reasonable free debate ... not once but twice (banning Haole and closing a topic).

Erin wrote:

Rip Van Winkle wrote: Any strict moderator, even Barb or Richard if they became babysitters, would eventually succomb to being censors to some extent ... because power corrupts.

Power corrupts?? We are talking about a notice board not ruling a country..*lol*