Setman's avatar

smokefree · Post by **smokefree** » 14 Dec 2006 12:04

david wrote:Shrug, make rules then. I just thought it would be really unfortunate if some kid saw that and was like "huh? these guys smoke?", and that somehow changed his footbag experience.

Oh you mean ignorant people?

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 14 Dec 2006 14:51

Modified needs clear-cut UNAMBIGUOUS rules for what can and can't be in an avatar. Without a proper set of guidelines to follow, there will always be questionable avatars that some people love and others hate, and which some people want to take down. It's just silly.

I agree totally. But before you all disagree with him and me remember he also said:

If it is not breaking any rules, then is should be allowed to stay up, unless Setman agrees to takle it down (which he has, nicely). But I reiterate, he shouldn't need to.

And this is exactly the type of environment I want to see develop -ie. we have a set of guidelines which creates the line over which the mods can't step. This is not to say other problems can't be solved, it is just to say that mods cannot be expected, and should not be permitted to shove the solutions down user's throats, unless there is a clear disregard for the rules.
In this case I personally felt that there was no breach of the guidelines and if Setman wanted to keep his avatar, I wouldn't have taken it down (I'm not sure what the other mod's views are). It does not consitite the sort of breach envisaged by the guidelines (by the way if anyone feels the current guideline regarding drugs on modified , or any of the guidelines for that matter, is still too ambiguous please offer an improved one in the guideline thread). That said I would have PM'd him and explained that even though he is completely free to keep it, modified is a community and we should consider the needs of other users, and that some users have expressed their wish to have his avatar removed for these reasons... If he felt that other users are asking too much of him and he kept the avatar, that's his descision to make.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 14 Dec 2006 15:56

There is no doubt that on the many other forums I've posted on, and from my time on modified, that community based decisions and solutions are far better than arbitrary decisions by people who were arbitrarily selected for their positions without any community input. I think the way Dave dealt with this was by far the best way an issue like this could be dealt with. If JM wants some clear cut rules these are what I would give.

If you think something is inappropriate for the forum follow the following steps.

1. Send the person a polite pm explaining your grievance and asking them to do something about it. Obviously the better your people skills, the more likely you are to succeed.

2. If you don't get a satisfactory response and it still bothers you, start a topic about it asking everybody else what they think.

3. Should the issue still be unresolved at this stage, I'd expect a moderator or admin to react based on their perceived view of which way the majority supports, along with their own intuition of how inappropriate it really is and to either remove the image/post or to leave it. I would hope they would only choose censorship when there is a very clear support for that path.

When I was a mod on this forum and on a number of other forums, I always saw issues resolved with this method by step 2 - except on 4 occasions (that I can remember) and in 3 of those the person involved is the same person and he's now banned.

I think this is a much better response. I can think of a large amount of times when the first step the mod staff has taken was to remove the offensive image/text that nobody had even complained about. In fact it was one of the biggest issues I had when I resigned (or part of it).

It's such a great demonstration of his character how Ken makes one post in this topic with the sole purpose of attacking me and with no constructive merit at all. I would remind Ken that the reason why I resigned as an admin was because things weren't working at all, and he, along with a few other people, who had no experience as mods were refusing to listen to me at all. I'm not saying they listened and then disagreed - they actually literally didn't listen ( or read, if you want to be technical). I felt there was no way I could work with such people and it was either a choice of them leaving or I leave. There's no way I would ever offer that kind of an ultimatum and so I made what was a very selfish decision, but also probably the best one. So things weren't perfect under my Adminship, and they've got even worse since. My hope for modified is that there are a few mods who are not so headstrong and are more than prepared to listen to people and to learn and I have faith that the people on modified will one day post on another internet forum and realise how much better this place could be.

bluntobj3ct · Post by **bluntobj3ct** » 16 Dec 2006 17:24

LOL @ "I think it's offensive"

ahhahhahahahahahhahhahahhahahhahhah
ahhaha
hahahahahha
ha

*breathe*

jumpin on the bandwagon is fun!!! especially when you jump on the COMPLETELY wrong one buahaha

Just call me hagesy · Post by **Just call me hagesy** » 17 Dec 2006 18:19

I can see where David is coming from with this.

However i think setman has the freedom to choose whatever avatar he wants. And in the end he was cool enough to take it off. So problem solved.

Post by **Zac Miley** » 18 Dec 2006 16:02

Hey, guy above me.

You're from Rockhampton, Australia.

Rod Laver was born there.

I know, I did a speech on him.

Just call me hagesy · Post by **Just call me hagesy** » 18 Dec 2006 18:25

I know

His brother owns squash courts in gladstone where i play tournaments at sometimes. i don't think i have ever met rod, i may be wrong but.

crazylegs32 · Post by **crazylegs32** » 19 Dec 2006 01:25

Damn I wish I knew setman smoked, I coulda shared with him at worlds LOL

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 19 Dec 2006 08:38

The world in general is ignorant, which is why Footbag hasn't been fully accepted by the masses yet, because it's ignorantly veiwed as a hippie pass time, instead of the fast paced, vigorous, precise, physically demanding spectators sport that it truely is.

I actually don't think there really is any such thing as ignorant. I think it's just an inability to see from another person's point of veiw, which is basically what it is. As soon as I get someone to see Footbag from my veiw, they ask where they can get a bag and good shoes. (Not everyone, I mean people at school and around my age and such....)

Kinda like how I just don't see how the hell you people are so worked up over what people (Mainly me.) say over the internet. However I've recently been attempting to conform without understanding the purpose.

But yea, I completely see where alot of parents would completely cut people off from the site, or worse, the sport if they found out that a majority of our populace smokes, let alone smokes marijuana. I really don't know if I spelt that right... It looks right, but it also doesn't for some reason... whatever.

Don't be so quick to call parents ignorant. Everyone's ignorant in one way or another.

Scott · Post by **Scott** » 19 Dec 2006 15:23

I don't see that finding out some footbag players smoke dope is going to be detremental to the sport.

Maybe times have changed but when I was a kid I didn't pay much attention to what my parents though was appropriate, actually it would probably be more appealing if my parents didn't want me to do it. What ever happened to rebelling against your parents.

Skateboarding is one of the most popular sports in the world today but has been widely perceived by the older generation as an undesirable activity.

Some kids might actually find it appealing that some of us smoke dope, drink and have a good time.

Just like to add that I don't smoke, take drugs or drink.

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 20 Dec 2006 07:57

Scott wrote:I don't see that finding out some footbag players smoke dope is going to be detremental to the sport.

Maybe times have changed but when I was a kid I didn't pay much attention to what my parents though was appropriate, actually it would probably be more appealing if my parents didn't want me to do it. What ever happened to rebelling against your parents.

Skateboarding is one of the most popular sports in the world today but has been widely perceived by the older generation as an undesirable activity.

Some kids might actually find it appealing that some of us smoke dope, drink and have a good time.

Just like to add that I don't smoke, take drugs or drink.

That's a really risky way of looking at things. Because rebelling doesn't always work. If they wanted to shut down skateboarding, they could. All it takes is a law, and some really intent cops. I wont' call them anal, or assholes, because I happen to be stuck between the option of being a police officer or a respiratory therapist... can't choose... Off topic, lol. Anyway.

Your idea is like... 'sex sells'... I don't know. It just gives it a dirty unappealing look. I don't find drinking attractive at all. I can't stand drinkin got be honest, and I can't do anything but pity the fool that is drunk... It just looks like an ultimate low. I think, god... you have to become a braindead dumbass to get some entertainment? Is your life really that dull? No, screw that. The only anit-drug commercial I've ever like and supported is the one with the 3 kids sitting on the couch. I'd have to quit footbag if it were widely and openly given the image of druggie burnouts... (Don't worry, if I quit, I'll still be here to annoy you all.

)

This is just my opinion of course.

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 24 Dec 2006 12:24

If people didn't think setman's avatar was acceptable.... why does everyone think brinard's A.T.H.F. (The one with Meatwad smoking a joint) is acceptable?

Post by **Zac Miley** » 24 Dec 2006 14:41

IMHO, it's not nearly as offensive as Setman's, because Brinard's is basically a joke. A wad of meat smoking a joint is definitely not going to bother anyone's parents (I would hope) and even with a long glance you can barely notice the joint.

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 24 Dec 2006 17:09

I live in a place where even that would get a kid grounded for a few weeks. If you're going to make Setman take away his, then there should be no drug related avatars period.

Post by **Zac Miley** » 24 Dec 2006 19:40

I am not a personal fan of drugs, but I still believe that having someone rolling a joint, lighting it, and then blowing smoke into the camera is a TON more offensive than meatwad with a joint in his mouth with bloodshot eyes.

Setman's also attracted more attention because it moved, and it was abnormally large.

(I am not advocating having drug-related anything on this forum, just so you know)

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 25 Dec 2006 13:02

A wad of meat smoking a joint is... first of all rediculous, it could never happen. Which is why I think Isilwar doesn't think it's as serious as Setman's avatar.

But pointing out the size of the joint is kinda pointless. Whether it's small, big, round or square, weed is weed is weed is weed is weed. Period.

Though the wad of meat that seems to be magically living and smoking a joint, is funny, IMO, and very impossible, I still have to agree with thenotoriospie on this one. Simply because it is weed in the picture.

If you're going to sensor drugs in one situation, you have to sensor drugs in all situations, period.

However, I beleive alcohol, and cigarettes are all fair game, because they are legal. The only reason I disagree with the illegal drugs on here is because, they're illegal, no matter what age you are.

That's just my opinion.

dp · Post by dp » 25 Dec 2006 13:18

You guys are looking at this completely wrong. Nobody made setman change his avatar, Dave started this topic and when people agreed with Dave, setman very kindly changed his avatar. Nobody was forced to do anything.

You guys are talking about it as if a mod, following a written rule of the forum, deleted his avatar or something. That simply didn't happen.

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 25 Dec 2006 14:17

Oh... my bad

thanks for explaining it though you sounded like a dick

Then I'll ask Brian.

Hey Brian, could you get rid of your avatar?

Post by **Zac Miley** » 25 Dec 2006 14:34

thenotoriouspie wrote:though you sounded like a dick

That was completely unnecessary and actually kind of pissed me off. He definitely did not sound like a dick, he was stating his opinion, just like you and I did.

You're right, Pirate Man. I forgot that he willingly took it off.

Brian's avatar should stay if he wants it to.

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 25 Dec 2006 16:21

Pirate Man wrote:You guys are looking at this completely wrong. Nobody made setman change his avatar, Dave started this topic and when people agreed with Dave, setman very kindly changed his avatar. Nobody was forced to do anything.

You guys are talking about it as if a mod, following a written rule of the forum, deleted his avatar or something. That simply didn't happen.

Agreed, however I was under the impression we were debating the possiblity of having some rules enforced on avatars and signatures. Because sometimes those guidlines are needed.

But if no rules are enforced, that's fine too, as long as one person isn't getting stomped on while another isn't... You know, be fair about it. If you're going to point out one person, point out all the people you know of that have those kinds of avatars, or any problems for that matter. Whether it's avatars, signatures, or just plain bad attitudes.

*Still agrees with thenotoriospie*