Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

It would be nice for the bans to be shorter, depending on what you did. Things like "Posting in a spam thread" should only be around a 1-3 hour ban (Kudos to the person who thought of the 1 hour ban idea!). I see no reason to be banned for 2-3 days for something small and stupid. Especially if the user hasn't done anything that is very offensive or bad. Or just let things like that slide a bit more often. I do agree there are a lot of immature users on Newgrounds now, but that's no reason to assume all of them are.

Also agreed that some of the Mods break the rules and set terrible examples.

PSS - A warning system would be nice too. Say you get 3 warnings in 1 day, you get a 3 day ban.

Expressing my frustrations once more. I don't like working on a photoshop just to see it getting deleted along with the entire thread. I'm not sure why this happens, but I feel demotivated to work on any more photoshops since this isn't the first time it happened.

ITT: People get false hope.

the mods didn't care about how this thread went at all did they?

At 9/26/09 10:28 PM, naronic wrote: the mods didn't care about how this thread went at all did they?

The main problem is that there's only so much that one group of people can do honestly to "help" something that is by definition all about opinion. On top of that, this place is just an Internet forum, and it's a small part of a much larger website overall obviously. Appealing to every single post in this thread alone was never going to happen, and naturally, some posts were worded in ways that came off less constructive than the poster intended. As a result, the worst ones become "everyone", and the mods aren't going to waste their own time with something they just think is full of whining morons like myself.

But I still think this thing is a good idea in theory. Maybe some people get "false hope" like Tramps said, but I think it's slightly more comfortable to throw something out here rather than get into the PM business for my own reasons. And yeah, even though this thread may not be so active anymore, it is actually entertaining bedtime reading for the sorts of people that use the place regularly enough to give even the tiniest damn about Internet politics. Trust me!

It doesn't help that people are complaining about the thing "failing" or "going to shit". That's part of the problem, as it is often referred to. You don't need to put in effort to just make things a little more enjoyable, you just need to think that tincey bit more positively, I think. Eh, didididid.

And I've actually made a friend or two here, so yay.

At 7/30/09 06:16 AM, MrCongeniality wrote: I think a thread spam whistle would be useful. Works like the portal whistle, and helps mods pinpoint down useless topics

;;;
They don't have a whistle, but you can simply contact Mod's by the PM system.
It usually doesn't take long for them to respond, I've contact a few who I see quite often in the politics form...where I post most often, when I've seen major spam etc. But all you have to do is find any mod who's on the site & drop them a line with your concerns.

I don't see that there's too much wrong with the BBS as it is right now, The problem I have with this site is the reviewing in the Flash Portal... you call a flash that's a flaming bag of shit, a flaming bag of shit & you get a review ban, or at least you get a threat of a ban via a 'bot' message.
I understand they were attempting to stop the intense flaming that was going on in there...but I think they went too far & if you explain why you believe something really sucks In Your Opinion. having a 'bot' warn you just sucks...so change that system is IMO what's needed more, than any major change of the BBS.

Although let us not forget this is a privately owned site & those that control the site can do what they want, & if you don't agree with that, no ones forcing us to come here !

Provide clearer, updated rules.

I've seen a lot of people get banned just because a mod didn't like a topic they made, that were legit according to the current BBS rules. They're more of a hazy form, and mods have to act on their instinct. Sometimes that doesn't work out so well.

I'm not saying all mods ban people just because they don't like them, but a clearer BBS ruleset would reduce bans.

Banning noobs is funny, but banning regulars is dumb.

At 9/27/09 10:51 AM, Pilot-Doofy wrote: Banning noobs is funny, but banning regulars is dumb.

I be regular?

At 9/26/09 10:28 PM, naronic wrote: the mods didn't care about how this thread went at all did they?

What exactly are we supposed to do? Half of the comments say "this place is shit, we need more rules/mods." The other half is saying "this place is shit, there are too many rules/mods." And the last half is saying "this place is perfect."

...yeah, I know... three halves! We don't get it either!!

We can't please one group without pissing off the other. So, really... what are we supposed to do?

At 9/27/09 11:56 AM, ReNaeNae wrote: What exactly are we supposed to do? Half of the comments say "this place is shit, we need more rules/mods." The other half is saying "this place is shit, there are too many rules/mods." And the last half is saying "this place is perfect."

Read the entire thread, about 80% was just "lolsucks" and "lolwin" but there were some excellent points made which appear to have been ignored entirely.

At 9/27/09 11:58 AM, citricsquid wrote: Read the entire thread, about 80% was just "lolsucks" and "lolwin" but there were some excellent points made which appear to have been ignored entirely.

I have read the entire thread... guess I missed them ...or maybe (speaking purely for myself) I didn't consider them 'excellent points.' Why don't you recap so we're all up to speed.

Nothing has been ignored. We're just not trumpeting any shifts in policy or changes. You're just simply have to go on faith that we're listening to you guys. Can't say much beyond that, but understand, we listen to all users in trust, because it's easier to hear someone's complaint when they aren't shouting via PM. Such was the option of this topic, to which I have seen multiple users politely offer multiple suggestions for the BBS to evolve.

Again, just popping in, but everyone's info is important. Thanks for sharing it.

At 9/27/09 12:11 PM, ReNaeNae wrote: I have read the entire thread... guess I missed them ...or maybe (speaking purely for myself) I didn't consider them 'excellent points.' Why don't you recap so we're all up to speed.

I think that in itself partly comes down to opinion itself anyway, but there are some good points hanging around, definitely. The best posts here, I think, are the ones that people have built on themselves a little bit to be a bit more exact without throwing all enjoyment of the BBS out of the window. Posts like that tend to be more moderate in what they ask and that's good, because frankly, it's no good to ask for immediate extreme change on something like an Internet forum. I doubt anyone has the time or the effort for that, and anyway like you said, some opinions are divided - the sorts of posts I'm talking about don't do this so much for good reason. I think we can all accept that most of those good posts were made towards the beginning of the thread, but still they are there, I assure you!

As for a recap... haha, I might have a go later if I really get that tired and bored with whatever it is I should be doing. Actually, people were talking about making recaps pages ago I believe, so maybe the work is already partly done, I can't remember. I think it would help to get something in brief though, just some issues and some responses or something, since then the thread can be promoted a bit more and become a little more accessible for future users looking to get shit off their chest regarding BBS shenanigans.

So yeah, watch this space, maybe ;)

At 9/28/09 05:24 AM, Scarab wrote: So yeah, watch this space, maybe ;)

I've taken the challenge given that I had a free bit of time to do this sort of thing, as much as I'm aware that the comments earlier were more for the sake of humour :) Knowing that not many people will want to read something entirely cold and serious while talking about this place, I've tried to make these recaps accessible to everyone regarding wording and layout: the idea is that you scroll down to something you're interested in. The snapshots taken here might come down to a bit of my own subjectivity (in some cases, I won't know all the facts about something, but I've tried to slot in what I know where I can), but yeah, whatever.

If use of this thread is encouraged in the future, this thing could always be improved. Oh, and as a starting note, I'm leaving off the general "mods should ban less people" argument, basically because I have no idea how many get banned in a day/week/month/whatever.

TL:DR? " All the major problems of the BBS can be solved with a healthy dose of LOVE. ;P" - NEVR, page 29, <3.

Right, okay?

***

Issue: The point of this thread.

Summary: A simple one really. The point of this thread is not for everyone to read a load of complaints and immediately change their posting habits. That's not cool. The real issue at hand is flagged up in Jonas' first post (where else?) and in several other posts afterwards. No one's perfect, so a suggestion or two doesn't hurt from time to time. Reading the posts in this thread and concluding, "Oh, nothing's changed. The BBS sucks, I'm going to rant about the moderators in a childish manner while more important things happen." isn't really appreciated in general.

And there's a reverse to that (see EyeLovePoozy, page 18: not trying to label or anything, that was just one example I'm using here!), but yeah, be patient with this thread and look back on the original points if it bothers you that much.

From the great Minion777 on page 15:

" I must admit, I was sceptical about the taste of this dish at first but I'm happy to say I was quite surprised.
Horrid to the eyes in the beginning but when I took a bite I was introduced to a multitude of flavours my taste buds had never experienced before, or hadn't been exposed to in quite some time. So juicy, so rich, so sweet, so, splendid.
It truly is a shame that this dish, this dish this dish this dish, isn't placed before my eyes more often."
Want to suggest some technical features? Read quote from gumOnShoe:

" Unfortunately, we probably can't actually request features in this thread as the Admins are hard at work on other projects which, in all honesty, are a little more important. Take the wide screen layout that they've been working on, and other updates, which are literally years in the works."

Suggestions for features go here.

Finally:

" I think this is quite possibly one of the best threads of the last six months, definitely the most interesting read." - BananaBreadMuffin, page 23. AGREE DAMN YOU.

***

Issue: Mods breaking rules themselves, aka "THE DOUBLE STANDARDS ISSUE OMG".

Summary: Most of the problems with this issue have come from users who see moderators just breaking simple rules and going after other users for doing the same sort of thing. It's a given that mods and, to a slightly different degree regulars, will "get away" with some things if it's just taken in a light-hearted manner and not done frequently, but there have been issues with this nonetheless. It's not something to be taken too seriously, but en masse, it can harm the joy factor of the BBS.

Just for more, quote from NEVR, page 16 (more discussion also there):

" Mods aren't and shouldn't be EXEMPT from the rules... but yes, we do seem to get a bit of leeway with the minor rules. That isn't to say that it's alright, it's just what happens. The same happens with more experienced regulars from time to time."

Of course, some see this as needlessly whiney and "realistic". When thing move into that latter realm, what I call "the Scarab Paradox" might come around (I like naming silly thing after myself). Example:

User 1: Damn, I got banned and I'm not sure why. What the Hell?
User 2: Shut up. Life is tough, so the BBS should toughen you up.
User 1: I think I'm going to complain somewhere.
User 2: Christ, the BBS isn't real life.

:)

***

Issue: Some rules not being added to the rules page.

Summary: Some mods have individually written guides available on their user pages to help users out with the more sketchy rules (NEVR's guide to backseat modding for example), but there are rules (rather than guides) that are not clearly flagged up on the rules page. Examples include some of the offences on Zerok's blog, the /thread rule, Forum Rules, Clarified (again, that last one is more of an ever-expanding guide, but users have asked for it to be labelled more often), and so on. It's accepted by some that many of the problems associated with this fall under the no-spam rule anyway, but it's apparent that some users have found this sort of thing a little frustrating.

***

Issue: Short, spammy posts that give nothing to the topic being allowed.

Summary: Not much to say here and it's kind of hard to work on if people aren't willing to "improve their posting habits". Some people have suggested these sorts of posts be deleted more often without a ban being involved, but this probably happens a lot of the time anyway.

***

Issue: THE SPAM THREAD RULE FWGWEGqef.

Summary: As you might've guessed, plenty of discussion has gone by on this. I'll let Headshot777 explain it basically:

"I think everything's all right, except that "No posting in a spam thread" rule. How can we tell if it's a spam thread when threads like Dickneck's get by? Or the kid with the gay haircut?"

Part of the problem comes down to the mod destroy function, particularly if the case is a sticky and opinion-y one. In some cases, it's very obvious. In others, possibly less so. From Headshot777's quote, and this isn't a good conclusion I know, with threads like Dickneck... it just happens. Seriously. If a thread is deemed after a certain period of time to be spam after all, perhaps the rule should not be used?

Also, see Malachy 03:31, page 12.

***

Issue: Backseat modding.

Summary: The best bet for you if you're struggling with this, is to check out NEVR's guide, written since this thread began. People have criticised the rule as a whole still, but its overall goal is to stop discussions from spiralling into spam. See also idle's words on page 19.

Issue: "It goes in your blog" and the no-story rule.

Summary: These rules are well-meaning in that they try to keep dull, undiscussible material off the BBS. The issue is that some have claimed the blogs aren't very well recognised for various reasons. A counter-argument is that mods should be tougher on this to ensure fewer "I did this at school" today threads, but really, you're going to get that anyway. In minor cases, the best thing is to just ignore the thing.

Writers have it slightly differently in that there's currently not much of an alternative bar the monthly writing contests held by users. While many writers (including myself!) have been frustrated with this, the only thing that can be done is to be patient. This thread is not about technical additions to the site, so lit portal discussion - nyet. Lit forum ideas have gone around, but I'm personally aware that it's been rejected on a few grounds for now (no source :)).

***

Issue: "The hardass routine".

Summary: The issue name is taken from HeartbreakHoldout, and I thought it summed up this pretty well. The "hardass routine" is when a mod goes out of his/her way to sound threatening for whatever reason. My opinion - it's for the naughty kidz really, but that's not really important. It's been said that this sort of attitude frustrates more people than it helps. Finding a moderate stance though would, understandably, be hard.

***

Issue: Rules being pointless?

Summary: This basically ends with this quote from Luis:

"If thats their best way(of having a discussion, by posting "lol cool" alone), then they are more suited towards downloading aim and having a conversation in that. The forum post engages users and invites more conversation. A good first post. or even one liner should do that at the very basic form. lol cool doesnt really offer anything to the topic."

The actual discussion went on for much longer.

***

Issue: Harshness to newer users.

Summary: Again, this one is hard to judge because us regulars can't see who's being banned and who's not. The final point is: if you can't post something useful in response to a new user without repeating other users, don't bother, but some have pointed out that some mods don't follow this thinking.

For the purpose of this point, "new user" means "recent user", and their thread would be asking about something that's been asked before. I think it's just about patience, but eh. Some also: "Some rules not being added to the rules page." above.

***

Issue: Bumping threads.

Summary: Not all bumps are bad - see Guide To Bumping Topics by Zerok.

***

Issue: Discussing 4chan and other forums.

Summary: This seems to have caused problems with some users. Again, quoting HeartbreakHoldout:

"Why do people have the sort of "us or them" attitude towards 4chan? Discussion about 4chan is perfectly appropriate here. 4chan is a place for anonymity, but what if you don't want to discuss 4chan in an anonymous way?"

That works in theory. Some users have accused mods of being biased against threads on 4chan however. It's supposed that 4chan discussion can boil down to spam, but many are quick to point out that /b/ is not the only part of 4chan, so discussion should be okay.

On the other hand, if you're discussing an Internet forum on an Internet forum, you must really be lonely and/or bored.

;)

***

Issues: More mods to be online at certain hours/active in certain forums.

Summary: This has to be agreed on by the BBS cultural elites of course! Not something that can be decided on easily, but it's a point that's been made anyway.

***

Issue: Response to criticism.

Summary: Some users have shown that some mods prefer to use the "go if you don't like it" line in the case of criticism. It can be accepted that the criticism in question may be clumsily worded without sounding too unconstructive. What's more is that BBS criticism tends to be specific, and some have pointed out that this should be recognised. If the criticism is not specific... well, forgive me for this, but it's probably downright wrong.

***

Issue: Lack of objective rules.

Summary: It's impossible. Seriously. Again, no one's perfect, and the BBS being the BBS, it's not worth putting the effort in. Really.

***

Issue: Users receiving BBS bans for non-BBS activity.

Summary: As far as I can tell, this only happens in a few select cases (which may be over by now). However, in the case of such a thing happening, see Malachy's post at the top of page 11. Other posts on that page are also relevant if you're concerned with this. See also page 16 for more.

***

Issue: Using "faggot" or related language on the BBS.

Summary: Oh boy, this is a big one, apparently. Mods have supposedly been told to make sure the word is not used by users on the BBS, but others have maintained that it's more of a matter of context (see DirtySyko on page 11, and further discussion on page 12-13).

See also EyeLovePoozy, page 26:

"I love calling people faggots all the damn time. Both on the internet and in real life, every chance I get.
The problem in question happens to be that IT IS AGAINST THE MOTHERFUCKING RULES TO CALL SOMEONE A FAGGOT ON THESE BULLETIN BOARDS. Therefore I refrain from doing so."

More on page 26-27.

***

Issue: Mods do not agree on where certain things need to be - DVD collection thread in particular.

Summary: I'm not sure if this has been cleared up since early June or so (I don't frequent C&C very often, and I've done some mild searching), but some users have been frustrated with the lock of the DVD thread and how an alternative has not been allowed in C&C either (from early June). From the regular point of view, this reaches on communication or something similar.

***

Issue: Old posts deleted "randomly".

Summary: gumOnShoe, page 15:

" There are some auto delete scripts that trim out really old posts. I don't know how they work or what their criteria is, but they've been running for a while now."

***

Issue: Too many young teenagers: need for a 18+ forum.

Summary: This has generally been given to individual users to make their own forums (associated with NG users), as aviewaskewed demonstrates. Others have pointed out that age verification is tricky. Otherwise, this is more of an object of posting threads that are likely to invite "older talk", so to speak.

***

Issue: Ban signings.

Summary: It basically doesn't have to be done for various reasons. See discussion pages 21-22 - Fyndir, idle, aviewaskewed, gumOnShoe, probably others I've missed out.

Dated issues:

Issue: Transformer.

Summary: Transformer.

This one actually is still relevant in a way, because it upholds that mods can't be expected to throw their sense of humour down at sign-in, but that in-jokes and the like could/should be made without really causing a bit of innocent confusion. But yeah, where's the humour in that, right? Well...

I've already brought this up myself (page 22), so jfiegheijfdp.

***

AND OMG CASUAL DRESS FRIDAYS - YOU GUYS ARE SO NOT READING THIS SHIT.

If anything notable is missing, give me a shout!

I feel that the BBS would substantially improve if Scarab were a mod.

At 9/29/09 08:28 PM, Digital-Terror wrote: I feel that the BBS would substantially improve if Scarab were a mod.

I know that posting about it may substantially diminish his chances, but seriously he should. All of his posts are well thought out and I can't see him locking anything or banning anyone without a well thought out reason.

the fact that if you guys dont like a thread you lock/delete it,and went we tried to reason with you guys you ban us. and give us the impression that you guys think you are better then us
and half the time you break the rules

At 9/29/09 08:50 PM, zombiemaster69 wrote: the fact that if you guys dont like a thread you lock/delete it,and went we tried to reason with you guys you ban us. and give us the impression that you guys think you are better then us
and half the time you break the rules

that would be a pretty big breach of what we are supposed to be doing here. I don't see anything in your ban records for this account or for your other one that would indicate such an instance happening to you, but if you wouldn't mined explaining this statement a bit that would be great. I honestly don't have an emotional reaction to threads on the BBS. If I see something that needs to be locked or deleted, I do so on the grounds that it is either A) against the rules, B) already done/currently has another thread, or C) has no discussion value.

If you PM me asking why a thread was deleted/locked or whatnot I will happily explain further. I will not, and no moderator will ban you for asking politely about something. There is a rule, however, not to complain about locks/deletions by creating a new thread, so if that is what you are talking about, I can see your confusion. We are happy to explain things via Private Messages, but if you make a new thread on the BBS to complain, that is technically against the rules and can get you banned.

At 9/29/09 09:05 PM, evan210 wrote: HOLY SHIT, STEM just bypassed the system!
http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/1109 224

I sense absolutely no action going down against STEM.

I second the creation of an 18+ forum. Not so that we can post "LOL HENTAI" threads all over the place, but because it'll cut down on the amount of stupid spam threads we get. Not because I'm assuming by 18 you're mature, but by cutting off a large amount of the population, less spam is likely to occur.

Also, I feel like NG is a mafia. Respect/age is a huge thing in the BBS, where you're looked down upon by 'the elite' regulars. An 18+ forum would help create less off of "GTFO" feeling to new users. (if they're 18+.)

Awhile ago I tried to make a group discussing soft drinks, only to have it locked because of "no discussion value"

The two reasons I didn't agree witht his lock where:
1) Didn't even give it a chance :(
2) There was a Dr Pepper only group that went on for pages!

I never made it again it again in fear of being banned.

Can you guys start deleting lockerz invite threads on sight? I don't think I'm alone in thinking that they're nothing more than lame ass spam threads. It gets old seeing people over and over like Z0MG JOO WUNT L0CKERZ INVITEZ?!?

If someone has threads that need immediate attention, I'm always available to ding via IM, it'll show up when I see it, but the biggest thing is making sure that you include what we're dealing with.

A lot of PMs come through with only a topic link, and we get a little lost if we don't know what we're looking for, since sometimes, it might be a user that needs a ban, or just simply the topic needs deletion, and sometimes it's not obvious 100% as to why someone throws us those links.

At 10/4/09 11:02 PM, Jonas wrote: If someone has threads that need immediate attention, I'm always available to ding via IM, it'll show up when I see it, but the biggest thing is making sure that you include what we're dealing with.

A lot of PMs come through with only a topic link, and we get a little lost if we don't know what we're looking for, since sometimes, it might be a user that needs a ban, or just simply the topic needs deletion, and sometimes it's not obvious 100% as to why someone throws us those links.

I've gotten many PMs exactly like that. There's a link and what they'll say is "You know what to do." and then what'll happen is I go to the link and it's not so obvious what the user thinks should be done. Descriptions of an offense make a huge difference in helping us clean up spam faster.

Thanks for the summary Scarab, it must have taken you a while to read this thread again, get notes then plan it all as you've done then actually do it. I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates this, and who actually read it all word for word :)

A new issue to me, or something anyway that have become more noticeable in the pass week, is the issue on trolls - Or people who claim in their threads to be trolling.

I would like to know the mods take on this.

Real trolling is actually clever and can be funny, the quickest examples I can personally think of are Dickneck and that time MadCow made that thread about being a girl who was purposely trying to put on weight. The latter was a goldmine actually.

Anyway, do mods take trolling or attempts to troll seriously? I know the threads I mentioned both ended in locks which was right, after the funny had worn off, but lately I've been seeing so many threads which are just down right trying to bait users - which yes do tend to get locked, but also what appear to be regular threads, but then the OP gets abuse or too many questions back at him about his thread, too many insults, too many people disproving what he's saying and turning on him, and then he'll turn around and basically reply with "I'm trolling you."

I see this as a cop out. I think users see this response as a way of saving face, to try and save themselves some dignity for making shit topics and getting abuse, or maybe they are trolling, either way, both are things I know I'd like to see less of on this forum. Fun topics are good, but serious discussions can be just as entertaining. I don't want to have to worry about "Is this user serious or not?" when I read their topic, and I swear sometimes it feels that way.

Yes, you can generally know troll topics from the title itself, how's it's laid out even from the user posting it, but the troll label comes out too much. I think I've heard people refer to me as a troll at least twice this week, which is just fucking bizarre. I don't troll, I just type what I feel like, it serves no greater proper, just me getting my feelings across, and I'd hate to wrongly get labelled that and not have people take seriously what I think in the future, and this works with every user who isn't trying to troll. If they get labelled one on the forums wrongly, it then might affect how we respond to him in other threads. idk.

Are mods going to tighten down on troll issues? Or have they? Would like feedback please :(

Issue: Moderator Bias.

Format: Recently, I've been given bad vibes from the Moderator Jamoke. I feel that he has a personal grudge against me. Usually, when legit threads that are within rules that I have made are deleted for no visible reason at all, Jamoke's on.

I have tried to contact him to ask him why he poses such negativity against me, but I haven't been given a reply. I think it comes down to the idea that I usually troll in and outside the site and the idea that I'm a /b/tard-/i/nsurgent-/b/rother-whatever.

It also seems that other users seem to have been pushed by the Moderation due to something they have done, do or status.

At 10/5/09 01:28 AM, igott wrote: Format: Recently, I've been given bad vibes from the Moderator Jamoke. I feel that he has a personal grudge against me. Usually, when legit threads that are within rules that I have made are deleted for no visible reason at all, Jamoke's on.

I've seen your threads. They fucking suck. You constantly catch shit because you post like an idiot. It's not just Jamoke.

At 10/5/09 02:18 AM, michelinman wrote:

At 10/5/09 01:28 AM, igott wrote: Format: Recently, I've been given bad vibes from the Moderator Jamoke. I feel that he has a personal grudge against me. Usually, when legit threads that are within rules that I have made are deleted for no visible reason at all, Jamoke's on.

I've seen your threads. They fucking suck. You constantly catch shit because you post like an idiot. It's not just Jamoke.

i dont know the user in question, nor am i here looking for a fight, but i will say, jamoke is the newest mod [ to my knowledge ] and one day on the front page of general, there were 5, 6 locked topics, all jamoke, all, umm, questionable? i think they made him a mod pretty quickly and then no one ever checked on him again

generally the mods are ok here, but, you know theyre an exclusive little club, and they will generally, act as such, you plebians, lol. but, i have my favorites, and they probably know who they are, and i have my hated ones, and im sure they know who they are, and jamoke, falls into neither category, so

Jesus i was going to read most of the thread before posting, but that is a 31 page wall of text. I haven't read the rest of the thread then, so i won't argue any points.

To keep this short, most moderators are dick heads. I'm not sure if a few starting being dicks, and the rest joined in because they wanted to fit in. I can tell you though, most moderators are dick heads now (they may not have started that way).

I'd say the most likely cause for this is the same reason why most cops are dicks; you deal with other dick heads 24/7. You never pm a user to tell him what a good post was. Mod's only interaction with NG users is to tell them they suck and then get shit for doing their job. This leads to mods hating NG users and becoming dick heads.

The solution? If you are a mod, take a good long look at how you have been doing your modding lately. Are you being a dick? Try to interact with users more on a positive level. stop being a dick.

My only other beef with the BBS is that you don't all do what Wade says. I've seen a few threads where mods do stupid shit and wade has to post and tell you to stop. That shouldn't happen and it makes it seem like each mod is a vigilante with his own brand of justice rather than one unified posting criteria. If you mod the BBS like it is lawless, then it will act lawless. I'd like to see some more consistent modding.

Ultimately, i'd love to see Wade as the only active mod. I love how wade mods... sure he gets a lot of hate for doing his job, but he also gets love for his threads. most importantly, wade is not a dick. I realize wade being the only mod is ludicrous, but all mods can try to mod more like him. i'm done typing now.