packerrats by subscription

[SkinBasket]

not huffing. not puffing. you were complaining about the abuse you've suffered here, I pointed out you're a bit of a dick yourself.

What abuse? I'm answering a question about the things I haven't agreed with. Stop being so gay.

I think you bring up a great point, and your point illustrates the reasons that Skin's utopia didn't work. It worked for a while, but then "for the most part", became "for the occasional part", and was then followed by "for the slim and none part". I'm obviously biased, but, I think this was a bigger reason than the "thread editing" that you believe was the reason.

It's not a utopia. It's a rule, or several, clearly communicated with enforcement of punishment, also clearly communicated. People will decide for themselves whether they want to post under those conditions and they will decide for themselves whether they choose to follow the rules. I would think it's been made fairly obvious by now that the good behavior of some cannot be achieved through regulation of all. And as nutz so eloquently pointed out, attempting to do so gives you one boring ass forum, of which the internet already has an abundance.

Re: policing yourself at work... I'm assuming people have the ability to not click on threads. Our forum isn't that compelling. If they're really that interested, they'll look at home.

[retailguy]

Re: policing yourself at work... I'm assuming people have the ability to not click on threads. Our forum isn't that compelling. If they're really that interested, they'll look at home.

I think you may be missing the point I'm making. It is a frequent occurence around here where the thread title is somewhat benign, yet the thread content drifts and gets "racy", sometimes quickly. I don't disagree with what you wrote above, if the thread title convey's NSFW, there is little issue or room to complain. Yet, in the situation I'm describing there is no/little warning, until "wham", you've got 65k colors of gay porn staring at you. Your only solution? To avoid the forum from work. Look at the number of posts after 5pm central or on a weekend vs. during the day in the middle of the week. Obviously folks are not on the forum (outside of gameday) during the evening and weekend... To grow, we've got to make things available when folks want to look at them, right? And I submit, could that situation be part of the reason that the Romper Room traffic and interest is down too?

Seems like a simple "rule" to me - The forum is either NSFW or it isn't. We have an NSFW forum. Do we really need two?

edit - Incidentally, I didn't mean anything by the "utopia" comment. I'm a little cynical there, due to my experiences, but I do agree that the best way to run a forum is to allow folks to police themselves. In my experience that didn't work out too well at all.

[MJZiggy]

What abuse? I'm answering a question about the things I haven't agreed with. Stop being so gay.



It's not a utopia. It's a rule, or several, clearly communicated with enforcement of punishment, also clearly communicated. People will decide for themselves whether they want to post under those conditions and they will decide for themselves whether they choose to follow the rules. I would think it's been made fairly obvious by now that the good behavior of some cannot be achieved through regulation of all. And as nutz so eloquently pointed out, attempting to do so gives you one boring ass forum, of which the internet already has an abundance.

Re: policing yourself at work... I'm assuming people have the ability to not click on threads. Our forum isn't that compelling. If they're really that interested, they'll look at home.

Why limit people? A lot of folks don't have time at home, but may want to peek in and chill for a few minutes during lunch hour. The vast majority of posters here (even the core posters) work.

[SkinBasket]

Why limit people? A lot of folks don't have time at home, but may want to peek in and chill for a few minutes during lunch hour. The vast majority of posters here (even the core posters) work.

Are you making a pro-censorship argument that starts with, "why limit people?"

I would answer, "because this place is a fucking wasteland."

[mraynrand]

T We do have to keep in mind, though, that the GC was put here specifically to contain stuff that was NSFW.

I thought it was specifically to protect against underagers getting exposed to a particular class of questionable stuff. NSFW is a far broader domain.

[MadtownPacker]

This is what has always made things difficult. I can see Skins perspective about not making the RR a G rated section because it is about adult conversation topics. But at the same time RG is right that people look at work. I would lean towards the one that brings more posts because it is the most common complaint I have heard for some time. I could see the adult discussions taking place in the RR but once post are linked to other content outside of PackerRats things change.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think accomodating work surfers is ridiculous. People can read the RR Room at home if need be, its not like they'll miss much.

For me, I kinda prefer the RR Room being PG rather than R rated. Its more interesting to try and be entertaining without the money shots. But I can see other perspective.

[Deputy Nutz]

I just want to be able to write dirty words when ever I want. I don't need to see dirty pictures outside of the garbage can. I have an imagination.

[SkinBasket]

I'm not as insensitive as I may seem towards those who view from work, but here's something to consider: We've had a puritan RR for something like 2 years now. How's that working out? No offense to those who contribute, but we have 2-4 threads a day that get a little activity and half of those are just lists of shit. Again, no offense. If you fuckers are looking at work, you sure as shit aren't saying much. What good is being able to look at the RR from work if there isn't anything to look at?

Retail, you talk about chancing on gay porn. That doesn't happen. Nor will it if expectations are set. There won't be an explosion of cocks in your face. At least not on the site anyway. Maybe we need a new forum called SFW, where people who might get fired can go look at a blank wall, because that's just about all we got as it is and we've been doing this your way for years.

[SkinBasket]

edit - Incidentally, I didn't mean anything by the "utopia" comment. I'm a little cynical there, due to my experiences, but I do agree that the best way to run a forum is to allow folks to police themselves. In my experience that didn't work out too well at all.

I wasn't offended. But my point was exactly the opposite. You guys tried your utopian idea of making the place as broadly appealing as possible to as many as possible and it's fallen flat on it's face as far as I can tell. It's shouldn't be a utopia. It should be, as I think Scott put it, a niche that draws people to it because it's different. We aren't smart enough to simply try to offer "brilliant" packer talk as our only draw, with off-topic forums as a afterthought. We've tried that for a few years and failed.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We've had a puritan RR for something like 2 years now. How's that working out? .

BS. You can do all the X-rated talk you want in the RR. I doubt dirty pictures will attract more viewers, but we'll have to hear from The People.

Retail, you talk about chancing on gay porn. That doesn't happen. Nor will it if expectations are set. There won't be an explosion of cocks in your face. At least not on the site anyway.

ya, Retail doth protest too much. It's always the uptight fussbudget with the little boys' dirty underwear hidden in the bottom drawer. I don't mean to call Retail a pervert, that goes too far, but my gaydar is flashing like a disco ball.

[SkinBasket]

What do you really think is going to change even if the romper room is considered "R?" Other than removing ambiguous, subjective regulation?

[Scott Campbell]

This is what has always made things difficult. I can see Skins perspective about not making the RR a G rated section because it is about adult conversation topics. But at the same time RG is right that people look at work. I would lean towards the one that brings more posts because it is the most common complaint I have heard for some time. I could see the adult discussions taking place in the RR but once post are linked to other content outside of PackerRats things change.

So if I'm reading this situation correctly, the choices are:

A) Choosing a more liberal point along the posting spectrum (Skin's view).
B) Choosing a more conservative point along the posting spectrum (RG's view).
C) Choosing a different point all together along the posting spectrum.
D) Not making a decision, and perpetuating the ambiguity.


I believe D is the worst answer.

In your shoes I'm going to try and choose the point that spurs the most good content creation. A rule is no good to you if it kills off good content creation. Even if there are otherwise valid reasons for considering such a rule.

[MadtownPacker]

I just want to be able to write dirty words when ever I want. I don't need to see dirty pictures outside of the garbage can. I have an imagination.

This hasnt really changed. I dont recall threads getting GCed over words in a post. Always over a fight or some pic.

[MadtownPacker]

So if I'm reading this situation correctly, the choices are:

A) Choosing a more liberal point along the posting spectrum (Skin's view).
B) Choosing a more conservative point along the posting spectrum (RG's view).
C) Choosing a different point all together along the posting spectrum.
D) Not making a decision, and perpetuating the ambiguity.


I believe D is the worst answer.

In your shoes I'm going to try and choose the point that spurs the most good content creation. A rule is no good to you if it kills off good content creation. Even if there are otherwise valid reasons for considering such a rule.

Enough with the Yoda shit. Im here for answers not questions.

I really dont see why R conversation needs to be blocked from RR. Im on the fence about embedded images or videos because those show up as hits on peeps work accounts.

[Little Whiskey]

I just want to be able to write dirty words when ever I want. I don't need to see dirty pictures outside of the garbage can. I have an imagination.

This! +1

I doubt anyone at work or at home with a child nearby will be "offended/fired" if the word fuck shows up.......its when it accompanied by a picture that causes a problem.

RG, makes a great point. its not so much that a thread with the Title NSFW, but it when a picture of an ass is put into a Nascar thread that I'm following. That causes the problem.