View Full Version : an issue with the site's server administrator

October 4th, 2009, 04:32
as per the forum rules:

If an idea requires public scrutiny, you may create a post in either "Site Related" or the "VIP Only" forum.


You may also file complaints in the "Site Related" forum.
i'm hoping THIS thread isn't snarkily replied to and locked by the staff member in question.

the issue occurred in this thread: http://www.ithinkimlost.com/anything-goes/13213-dad-arrested-japan-after-trying-get-his-kids-back.html

the server administrator was quite clearly spamming the forums by creating this thread when an identical thread already existed. in standard forum practice, this calls for a fifty hitler post, which was graciously supplied. the issue in question is what occurred AFTER this standard procedure.

the server administrator edited the fifty hitler post into an insulting comment regarding the original poster's genitalia.

now, the initial edit was itself unwarranted by forum rules. the server administrator later justified this action here: http://www.ithinkimlost.com/anything-goes/13214-attn-kek.html#post465479 by claiming the fifty hitler post was 'spam'. the definition of a spam post in the forum rules is as follows:

Commercial advertising, or the promotion of your own site ("spamming"). An exception is if your product or website is JET related. You may put any "safe for work" links in your signature if you wish.the fifty hitler post is not spam by the forum's own rules, and therefore should not have been subjected to moderation in the first place.

however, if this decision was made according to the fine print at the end of the forum rules, specifically the section regarding the site owner's decisions over-ruling other forum rules (and if i've been following the site ownership dramas correctly, the server administrator is not the site owner anyway), then shouldn't the initial spam post (ie the thread OP) have been edited in the same fashion?

regardless of the previous two points, according to both the current site owner and the server administrator himself:

Now kek is our full-time server administrator. He will control absolutely no social aspect of this site.

The deal me and Trivial have, was that he deals with the public, and I stay locked in the basement beside the server, fixing it whenever it decides to throw a wobbly. Anything public related / moderation related, that's all up to Trivial.

Anyway, I vow to keep the server trouble free as much as I can and help out Trivial with the technical aspects of the site. Anything else is up to him.

the server administrator should not be editing the posts of others on the forum! as trivial pointed out in the other locked thread, he has handed the reins over to dpv, but dpv has made no announcements regarding a change in the server administrator's role.

the fifty hitler post should not have been edited, especially not by the server administrator, and especially not in the manner in which it was done.

October 4th, 2009, 07:43
If you do not like the forum, you may stop viewing/posting on the site.

Your post was spamming. Spamming falls under server administration.

October 4th, 2009, 08:27
Dear valued customer,

We are glad to hear you enjoy using ITIL's wide variety of goods and services.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Customer satisfaction is our number one priority here at ITIL and we will be launching a full internal investigation into the matter.

At this time we would like to offer you a 10 shilling gift voucher as a sign of our gratitude.

Yours Sincerely,

Director of Public Realtions

October 4th, 2009, 11:50
If you do not like the forum, you may stop viewing/posting on the site.
perhaps you should read the original post again. at no point in the post did i say, imply, or state anything that could be construed as meaning that i did not like the forum. i quite enjoy the forum; if i didn't, why would i be posting on it? this sounds like a kneejerk response to criticism and is not particularly useful in this situation.

Your post was spamming. Spamming falls under server administration.
does this mean that spamming can only be performed by the server administrator?

this response has 3 inherent problems with it.

1. in no way was the post spam as outlined in the forum rules. even by widespread forum standards the post wouldn't even be considered spam unless the dictator had been represented MORE than fifty times.
2. if the post was truly considered spamming, shouldn't the same response have been applied to the initial spammed post in the thread?
3. even if 'spamming falls under server administration', editing the post to read 'i have a small penis' does not. if you were so desperate to besmirch another poster's good name like that, shouldn't you have contacted one of the forum moderators to make the change for you? surely this kind of action falls under 'social moderation' and not 'server administration'.

October 4th, 2009, 15:49
shush now children

October 4th, 2009, 15:58
don't say a word

October 4th, 2009, 16:00
about this to your parents or you will get in trouble, it'll be our little secret

October 4th, 2009, 16:07
spam edit

October 4th, 2009, 17:32
i have a small penis

last edited by Paul

October 4th, 2009, 19:38

October 4th, 2009, 21:59

October 4th, 2009, 22:35

Mr. Plainview
October 4th, 2009, 23:08
oh goddamn.

he didn't know there was already a thread. you could have told him instead of posting 50 pictures. he can edit things to make the site function better, which he did by getting rid of 50 repeat pictures. should he have called you out on having a tiny dick? no, that's definitely a "shame on him." what do you want me to do? give him an infraction? you know what, sure. He just got an infraction. he shouldn't have talked about your winky, but there was nothing wrong with him getting rid of a bunch of repeat pictures.

so say I, and so shall it be.

October 5th, 2009, 00:14
You have to remember another issue: I'm not on staff right now.

spam edit
Last edited by Trivial; Yesterday at 20:59.


October 5th, 2009, 00:22
so say I, and so shall it be.
yup, all good. thanks for dealing with this.

quick clarification - if i win an e-duel against paul, do i become the server administrator?

October 5th, 2009, 00:49
why do you want to keep pushing this?

October 5th, 2009, 01:12
cause he's got a small..... number of medals?

October 5th, 2009, 09:20
cause he's got a small..... number of medals?
i hear talking but i do not hear e-dueling

October 5th, 2009, 17:36
I'm locking this thread as it's gone way off topic. This forum is for site related discussion only.