...and that is tagging ranks to members - which is the foundation for prefferential treatments and allowing one members to get away with what others members can't.


Could you please elaborate what you mean by this Masoud jaan...

Bhonar jaan - take ISP
Members are tagged as ball boy, TM player, Coach, News Team, ISP Supporter, ..............might as well create another category and call it "Untouchable". As bad as it is for someone like me to be a "Ball Boy" after 10 years of brilliant posts (semi joke) - but worst is to have idiots tagged as something above some others. As you know I am against things like member of the month, Senior vs. Junior members, .......too - especialy in cases when members votes are required - and we all know how that can turn out, with multiple user-name problems etc......

BTW - something else I add to my last post
5- We all have different definitions of throlling. To me the biggest thollers are those who quote a five paragragh post and the only comment they make is: What a load of crap!!! without pointing out any specific issue they have a problem with and/or point out the false. To me throllers are those who read a post in hope to come up with something to dispute - when they can't find faults with the logic they try to win on technicalities such as: No it was not 1955 it was 1956 or no it was not 12000 people it was 11000....... These are the biggest throlls - and they can ruin a thread when they have an entourage of friends/herders from private forums and or buddies with multiple usernames.

I can't tell you how much I appreciayte seeing Behrou and Kasra openly disagree on something here. What would be a pitty is seeing 7 admins all vote the same on any issue - a certain sign of a small dictatorship.

Bhonar jaan -

I can't tell you how much I appreciate seeing Behrou and Kasra openly disagree on something here. What would be a pitty is seeing 7 admins all vote the same on any issue - a certain sign of a small dictatorship.

Yes this is a very important point that Masoud is making and very much appriciated.

Sadly at ISP site (cult) the situation is as such that group of people that we all know them agree on EVERYTHING with each other from politic, to soccer. On top of that they think their way is the only correct way on earth and they know everything and I mean everything. Say if someone post something against the circle ideas there, they have what I call Groupeh ZARBAT. they just reply and say no this is wrong then 50 other people from their group ( I call them (SIAHI LAshkhar) come and put thank you on the post and finally some one from chaleh maydoon come out and screams profanity. But if the same idea come out of one of their "circle" members, they immediately agree with it!!!! this was actually my subject last post there after IZ put a poll up.

Is Niloufar around at all? is she on this site? She is really missed.

Finally Kazaem jan inghadr man ra azar nadeh, you know how much I respect you, baba Alila golegavzabon ham amadeh dareh and Safar promised not to report any match :-)

Behrou jan, I have couple of points about this, but have been really busy at work. I will get back to you late tonight.
By the way Behrou, please answer the question I asked u. Assume GP was not a member here and showed up in the moderation queue that you proposed and wrote a nice letter to you. Would you have approved him or not?

Bhonar jaan - take ISP
Members are tagged as ball boy, TM player, Coach, News Team, ISP Supporter, ..............might as well create another category and call it "Untouchable". As bad as it is for someone like me to be a "Ball Boy" after 10 years of brilliant posts (semi joke) - but worst is to have idiots tagged as something above some others. As you know I am against things like member of the month, Senior vs. Junior members, .......too - especialy in cases when members votes are required - and we all know how that can turn out, with multiple user-name problems etc......
The ranks we have are automatic ranks, if you reach a certain amount of posts you reach senior member, it is the default system in Vbulletin, we havent made any changes to it. Actually somewhat related we also want to remove the admin rank to moderator or IC team member or something since the admin title makes it seem like the admins are above the moderators or others and hat isnt really the case.

BTW - something else I add to my last post
5- We all have different definitions of throlling. To me the biggest thollers are those who quote a five paragragh post and the only comment they make is: What a load of crap!!! without pointing out any specific issue they have a problem with and/or point out the false. To me throllers are those who read a post in hope to come up with something to dispute - when they can't find faults with the logic they try to win on technicalities such as: No it was not 1955 it was 1956 or no it was not 12000 people it was 11000....... These are the biggest throlls - and they can ruin a thread when they have an entourage of friends/herders from private forums and or buddies with multiple usernames.
The definition of trolling is a subjective one, we have also stated that in the rules, to limit difficulties trolling will be upto the judgement of the moderators, even putting a clear description would still make subjected to personal judgement.

My good bro, for an extremely intelligent guy, you sure can be a little short-sighted at times. ;) You want people to hang themselves give them some rope... Don`t like that one´... How about it`s easier to catch flies with honey than vinegar... Still no... Sar baa panbeh boridan chi...

Aziz, when we all know exactly who these idiots are and what their game is, what's the need for playing cat and mouse?

A stern warning that their BS will not be tolerated will get the job done just fine. I see no need to even pretend to be friendly to either one. I feel dirty just thinking about it!

Sadly at ISP site (cult) the situation is as such that group of people that we all know them agree on EVERYTHING with each other from politic, to soccer. On top of that they think their way is the only correct way on earth and they know everything and I mean everything. Say if someone post something against the circle ideas there, they have what I call Groupeh ZARBAT. they just reply and say no this is wrong then 50 other people from their group ( I call them (SIAHI LAshkhar) come and put thank you on the post and finally some one from chaleh maydoon come out and screams profanity. But if the same idea come out of one of their "circle" members, they immediately agree with it!!!! this was actually my subject last post there after IZ put a poll up.

You're absolutely right, FZ jan. The childish clique mentality and the khaale-zanaki use of the Thank You button was really starting to annoy me. There is one particular guy who seems to be on a mission to thank every single post of a certain other member! I swear he's probably thanked %80 of his posts.:) It's downright creepy at this point.

Behrou jan, I have couple of points about this, but have been really busy at work. I will get back to you late tonight.
By the way Behrou, please answer the question I asked u. Assume GP was not a member here and showed up in the moderation queue that you proposed and wrote a nice letter to you. Would you have approved him or not?

I personally wouldn't have approved ANYONE with any sucpicious information of any kind attached to them. If they sent a letter and I was convinced that they're a legitimate user, of course I would have released them ann kept a very close eye on them - one strike, out.

Here's a good passage from Wiki, which I hope you find useful:

"Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they — and the troll — understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group. "

P.S. The only important issue on dealing with trolls IMHO is the clarity and consistency of the policies and decision making process.

A stern warning that their BS will not be tolerated will get the job done just fine. I see no need to even pretend to be friendly to either one.

You're absolutely right bro. Yeki az akhlaaghaaye bade iroonime I guess that I always feel I have to go out of my way to be polite to guests and make them feel welcomed. In all honesty, there have been few guests in my life, which I should have kicked out pretty hard and would have felt damn good about it. At least I wouldn't have been kicking myself afterward (like I do now) wondering how I let someone that disrespectful to me and my other guests to stay in my house. :drinking47:

I personally wouldn't have approved ANYONE with any sucpicious information of any kind attached to them. If they sent a letter and I was convinced that they're a legitimate user, of course I would have released them ann kept a very close eye on them - one strike, out.

Here's a good passage from Wiki, which I hope you find useful:

"Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they — and the troll — understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group. "

P.S. The only important issue on dealing with trolls IMHO is the clarity and consistency of the policies and decision making process.

I have to run because I am late for a meeting. But quickly:
If we assume that is the way everyone thinks about, I don't think it is that big of a deal to kick them out after couple of days (when we know they are logging in with different and unknown IP addresses and are going to be trolling) as opposed to we stop them before signing up. However if we stop everyone from signing up until approval we might lose some legitimate users who don't have the patience to wait. That was the main reason I opposed blocking everyone and I still think it is wrong to judge people before seeing who they are. But if we are sure about someone we can stop them from posting or right after their first post.
I am all for that definition. Let's work on it and make a definition that everyone is happy with and stick with it.

IZ jaan, the rest of the team members can correct me if i'm wrong, but the way were trying to deal with trolling and other moderation issues is by posting a clear set of rules and implementing them. If a member (whatever his username) trolls, is abusive, etc. we will deal with them according to the rules. We (or at least I) are A LOT more lenient on things such as cursing which often happen in heated discussions, but were going to try to be harsh on trolling and things such as threats or the revieling of personal info.

Do you personally think that there is a better way to handle this issue?

And as far as even addressing these lajans, I personally would never waste my time. But I'm not going to judge someone else who does. Different people have different personalities.

You're absolutely right bro. Yeki az akhlaaghaaye bade iroonime I guess that I always feel I have to go out of my way to be polite to guests and make them feel welcomed. In all honesty, there have been few guests in my life, which I should have kicked out pretty hard and would have felt damn good about it. At least I wouldn't have been kicking myself afterward (like I do now) wondering how I let someone that disrespectful to me and my other guests to stay in my house. :drinking47:

As agha Rasoul says, if they are uninvited, then they aren't really guests. They're mozaahem. :D

As agha Rasoul says, if they are uninvited, then they aren't really guests. They're mozaahem. :D

Well Ramin jaan, this isn't an invitation-only forum. If you recall that was one of my other ideas that didn't receive a warm reception. :whistle: In that sense, everyone who walks in here is a guest. No?

IZ jaan, the rest of the team members can correct me if i'm wrong, but the way were trying to deal with trolling and other moderation issues is by posting a clear set of rules and implementing them. If a member (whatever his username) trolls, is abusive, etc. we will deal with them according to the rules. We (or at least I) are A LOT more lenient on things such as cursing which often happen in heated discussions, but were going to try to be harsh on trolling and things such as threats or the revieling of personal info.

Do you personally think that there is a better way to handle this issue?

And as far as even addressing these lajans, I personally would never waste my time. But I'm not going to judge someone else who does. Different people have different personalities.

Ramin jan, we should never let our decency and humanity lull us into passivity toward those who not only lack those qualities but stand against both.

This is just my own view and I don't wish to force it on the rest, but since you asked, in the case of the two yahoos I would have banned both just to send a clear message: We know who you are. You are not welcome here. Let them come back under different handles if they're that desperate and we'll deal with them accordingly, but the message is sent.

I see nothing wrong in making an exception to the rules when the people in question are known trolls with no interest in an honest, serious discussion. Neither of these characters deserve an ounce of courtesy from us.

Ramin jan, we should never let our decency and humanity lull us into passivity toward those who not only lack those qualities but stand against both.

This is just my own view and I don't wish to force it on the rest, but since you asked, in the case of the two yahoos I would have banned both just to send a clear message: We know who you are. You are not welcome here. Let them come back under different handles if they're that desperate and we'll deal with them accordingly, but the message is sent.

I see nothing wrong in making an exception to the rules when the people in question are known trolls with no interest in an honest, serious discussion. Neither of these characters deserve an ounce of courtesy from us.

IZ jaan, I agree with everything you said, but would like to make a note that there is no need to make "exceptions to the rules". Rules are never meant to be set in stone and must change and be refined in order to keep up with dynamic situations and new developments. In that sense, the new rules apply to everyone and there's no need to make any exceptions. For example, the team can very well change its trolling rule to say something along the lines of:

"IC will remove any and all persons with any type of trolling activity or history, whether such activity or history is related to IC or other sites. The determination of what is trolling or whether any action is required, is at the sole discretion of the elected IC Team."

BTW IZ jaan, as related to your decision not to post on ISP anymore, I hope that you will take a more hands-on role with IC. Many of us left for many or all of the same reasons and our logic was the it's not the physical server location that determines where we need to be. It's the people that make these forums and where and when there are no limitations on what we can say or do, the sky is really the limit and that's not just a cliche.

:chekerim:

I also like what IZ is saying -
I feel kind od silly to respond to anyone with a handle General Parsaian - regardless of which one I deal with. The handle just has a sad hsitory. Maybe we can retire some jerseys/handle names!!! If they want - they can come back with a different handle - that way IC can save some aberoo too.

Well Ramin jaan, this isn't an invitation-only forum. If you recall that was one of my other ideas that didn't receive a warm reception. :whistle: In that sense, everyone who walks in here is a guest. No?
hahah. baba maa ye shookhie koochik kardam shoma ham jeddi gerefteen. i agree with what you said above.
Ramin jan, we should never let our decency and humanity lull us into passivity toward those who not only lack those qualities but stand against both.

This is just my own view and I don't wish to force it on the rest, but since you asked, in the case of the two yahoos I would have banned both just to send a clear message: We know who you are. You are not welcome here. Let them come back under different handles if they're that desperate and we'll deal with them accordingly, but the message is sent.

I see nothing wrong in making an exception to the rules when the people in question are known trolls with no interest in an honest, serious discussion. Neither of these characters deserve an ounce of courtesy from us.

IZ jaan the reason that I think that it's best to wait for any member (including these two) to make a mistake before banning them is so that other members (because there will be other trolls) can see that as long as they follow the rules they are welcome here. But that breaking the rules will result in a ban. The problem i see with banning their handles right off the bat is that they will (and ARE desperate enough) to come back with another handle and will try harder to disguise themselves, making it harder for the moderator to smoke them out and deal with them accordingly.

For me this isn't an issue of humanity or descency, but a matter of practicality. I think that we should try and keep it simple. You break the rules (by trolling), your no longer welcome here. I think it's better and easier for us to deal with the trolling instead of dealing with the handle (the character).

And please don't feel hesitant in sharing your opinion on such matters. Trolling is an issue that will never really go away and it's something that must be dealt with. So the more ideas we have available the better.

IZ jaan the reason that I think that it's best to wait for any member (including these two) to make a mistake before banning them is so that other members (because there will be other trolls) can see that as long as they follow the rules they are welcome here. But that breaking the rules will result in a ban. The problem i see with banning their handles right off the bat is that they will (and ARE desperate enough) to come back with another handle and will try harder to disguise themselves, making it harder for the moderator to smoke them out and deal with them accordingly.


That's definitely a valid argument too. Well put Ramin jaan. :bow2:

IZ jaan, I agree with everything you said, but would like to make a note that there is no need to make "exceptions to the rules". Rules are never meant to be set in stone and must change and be refined in order to keep up with dynamic situations and new developments. In that sense, the new rules apply to everyone and there's no need to make any exceptions. For example, the team can very well change its trolling rule to say something along the lines of:

"IC will remove any and all persons with any type of trolling activity or history, whether such activity or history is related to IC or other sites. The determination of what is trolling or whether any action is required, is at the sole discretion of the elected IC Team."
That sounds very good. In fact I think we should implement that immediately!

BTW IZ jaan, as related to your decision not to post on ISP anymore, I hope that you will take a more hands-on role with IC. Many of us left for many or all of the same reasons and our logic was the it's not the physical server location that determines where we need to be. It's the people that make these forums and where and when there are no limitations on what we can say or do, the sky is really the limit and that's not just a cliche.
I definitely agree with the general point, but there are two issues which get in the way of me having a more hands on role. One is time, and the other is that being a mod or Admin will force me to change my approach which I really don't want to do.

Of course if my help is absolutely needed at some point, I'd be more than willing to help on a temporary basis.

The problem i see with banning their handles right off the bat is that they will (and ARE desperate enough) to come back with another handle and will try harder to disguise themselves, making it harder for the moderator to smoke them out and deal with them accordingly.
Fair enough, Ramin jan. But let's say we give them a chance and ban them later, what's going to stop them from coming back as you said? We're not really solving that problem by waiting.

What I like about the instant ban is the message it sends: This is not a troll playground like ISP. Don't even waste your time.

For me this isn't an issue of humanity or descency, but a matter of practicality.

I brought up the decency issue to address the friendly reception and show of respect I was seeing toward the bozos. Just wanted to make sure my friends don't allow these vermin to take advantage of their good nature.

I definitely agree with the general point, but there are two issues which get in the way of me having a more hands on role. One is time, and the other is that being a mod or Admin will force me to change my approach which I really don't want to do.

Of course if my help is absolutely needed at some point, I'd be more than willing to help on a temporary basis.

The funny part is that it does not require any more time than most of us already spend here. I've actually been spending more time on the forum than when I was in the team! :dunno:

And I hear ya' on the second point bro. That's a BIGGIE for me too. If you want the honest truth though, I think your approach brings the level of challenge to the status quo that the IC Team will greatly benefit from. We took some small steps yes, but we didn't take any leaps - because leaps can not be taken with your feet firmly pressed against the ground. Leaps are a challenge and challenges are what the IC Team needs to take those leaps IMHO.

The guys in the team may act like they're doing a lot of hard work to keep this forum going, but let me give you some inside info... they are all having the times of their lives in there! I mean we spent more time in there with each other than we do with most, if not all of our other friends! You are really part of a family in there. Being in the team is not a chore... it's a pleasure. Why do you think there's no rush to implement some of these ideas that may shuffle the people around? ;) You think it's because these guys aren't committed to the idea of democracy? I assure you IZ jaan, they are just as committed, if not more than, you and I. But who wants to leave that kind of a family?!

Just because I'm the kind of kid who would sneak out given half the chance, it doesn't mean that I'm not going back as soon as I'm done playing in the streets! :Ban-Cha:

So does this mean we are all in agreement to ban General Rashti?

"IC will remove any and all persons with any type of trolling activity or history, whether such activity or history is related to IC or other sites. The determination of what is trolling or whether any action is required, is at the sole discretion of the elected IC Team."

Behrou jan, you will get little resistance from anyone to pass such a rule, however even if we pass a rule like this, the biggest problem of all is still remaining. Even though it is very clear what the definition of a troll is and you don't need to repost it, it is very hard to get everyone to agree whether all or even some of the characters under question fit the description. We have a spectrum of users who range from conspiracy theorists and "suspicious of everyone" type who are ready to pull the trigger for everyone who doesn't agree with their opinion (which by the way is crystal clear to them and should be to everyone else), to unbelieving members who would be happy to accept any one with any type of ideology as a member in the spirit of democracy, to people who just enjoy certain stories, and above all members who flip flop between these types depending on which way the wind is blowing. With that kind of a spectrum it is very hard to collectively agree on whether a user is a troll and pull the trigger on him. That is why I brought up the definition discussion. It is not hard to play the roll of a part-time troll (kind of like the 80-20 rule that Masoud was referring to) to look like a legit user but still serve an agenda.

So does this mean we are all in agreement to ban General Rashti?
Mac,
Actually I was thinking of banning your azz, you pervert.:mf_boobies:

The funny part is that it does not require any more time than most of us already spend here. I've actually been spending more time on the forum than when I was in the team! :dunno:

And I hear ya' on the second point bro. That's a BIGGIE for me too. If you want the honest truth though, I think your approach brings the level of challenge to the status quo that the IC Team will greatly benefit from. We took some small steps yes, but we didn't take any leaps - because leaps can not be taken with your feet firmly pressed against the ground. Leaps are a challenge and challenges are what the IC Team needs to take those leaps IMHO.

The guys in the team may act like they're doing a lot of hard work to keep this forum going, but let me give you some inside info... they are all having the times of their lives in there! I mean we spent more time in there with each other than we do with most, if not all of our other friends! You are really part of a family in there. Being in the team is not a chore... it's a pleasure. Why do you think there's no rush to implement some of these ideas that may shuffle the people around? ;) You think it's because these guys aren't committed to the idea of democracy? I assure you IZ jaan, they are just as committed, if not more than, you and I. But who wants to leave that kind of a family?!

Just because I'm the kind of kid who would sneak out given half the chance, it doesn't mean that I'm not going back as soon as I'm done playing in the streets! :Ban-Cha:

I think I am going to change your title to Mr. Matalak from now on. :chekerim:
And hence, I am going to do some matalak parooni.
Being on the IC team doesn't really take that much time if you take an average of hours you spend doing work for the team. It is about making a commitment to take part of the responsibility and make decisions that you can defend in front of others. We all know certain people who take vacations when time comes to do the actual job. ;)
I think what most people like to do is to visit the site during their free time and take part in discussions whenever they feel like it. And if a fight breaks out they rub their hands together and enjoy. When it comes down to moderation, there is no such a thing as sitting and enjoying the fight. Any decision you make is going to make someone unhappy and there are not many people who are prepared to deal with that feeling.
But I like your sales pitch about it not being that much work, let me know if you want to try it. :looti:

I think I am going to change your title to Mr. Matalak from now on. :chekerim:
And hence, I am going to do some matalak parooni.
Being on the IC team doesn't really take that much time if you take an average of hours you spend doing work for the team. It is about making a commitment to take part of the responsibility and make decisions that you can defend in front of others. We all know certain people who take vacations when time comes to do the actual job. ;)
I think what most people like to do is to visit the site during their free time and take part in discussions whenever they feel like it. And if a fight breaks out they rub their hands together and enjoy. When it comes down to moderation, there is no such a thing as sitting and enjoying the fight. Any decision you make is going to make someone unhappy and there are not many people who are prepared to deal with that feeling.
But I like your sales pitch about it not being that much work, let me know if you want to try it. :looti:

LOL. No matalak was intended Mr. Ped. You're absolutely right that being in the team is a "commitment" in terms of how you look at things and serving a bigger purpose. That's why it's important for all of us to do take a vacation after much shorter periods - of maybe 3-4 months and actually enjoy the fruits of our work out here - whenever we feel like it and saying whatever we feel like.

I certainly enjoyed my time in the team and learnt a lot of things and I thought it was important for people to know that it was not a chore, rather a responsibility that I was very proud of. And I'm sure everyone else feels that way and deserves to be out here for a while really enjoying themselves and even giving people in there a hard time! ;)

Behrou jan, you will get little resistance from anyone to pass such a rule, however even if we pass a rule like this, the biggest problem of all is still remaining. Even though it is very clear what the definition of a troll is and you don't need to repost it, it is very hard to get everyone to agree whether all or even some of the characters under question fit the description. We have a spectrum of users who range from conspiracy theorists and "suspicious of everyone" type who are ready to pull the trigger for everyone who doesn't agree with their opinion (which by the way is crystal clear to them and should be to everyone else), to unbelieving members who would be happy to accept any one with any type of ideology as a member in the spirit of democracy, to people who just enjoy certain stories, and above all members who flip flop between these types depending on which way the wind is blowing. With that kind of a spectrum it is very hard to collectively agree on whether a user is a troll and pull the trigger on him. That is why I brought up the definition discussion. It is not hard to play the roll of a part-time troll (kind of like the 80-20 rule that Masoud was referring to) to look like a legit user but still serve an agenda.

Great post Mr. Ped. I think the consensus out here seems to be shifting toward taking action against at least one individual to make a point. It looks as if just the frank discussion of the topic has kept away the trolls for now. I also think that the topic envokes a lot of reaction based on past experiences and not necessarily what's oging on here or lack of action from the IC Team.
:chekerim:

Doostan

What is the meaning of tolerating and even welcoming and entertaining arazel o obash that refer to ISP community as tavileh and barn people?

I have not been around for a while, but this is rather questionable version of "democracy". Have things gotten so bad? Aren't within this community, good members that frequent both sides? Why are you tolerating insults to your friends?

Doostan

What is the meaning of tolerating and even welcoming and entertaining arazel o obash that refer to ISP community as tavileh and barn people?

I have not been around for a while, but this is rather questionable version of "democracy". Have things gotten so bad? Aren't within this community, good members that frequent both sides? Why are you tolerating insults to your friends?

Rather strange post. We did everything for ISP, now we even have to stand up and argue with people expressing their opinions on ISP?! Wouldn't it make a little more sense for people to stand up and defend themselves and their own actions?

I don't kow what's a more questionable version of democracy Aram jaan, one where people can express their opinions without being treated like barn animals or one where people are expected to walk around with dastmal-yazdi and do a little polishing job on those who treat people like barn animals?! :dunno:

Behrou Jon

I don't think is a strange question. Very simple. Calling a community "tavileh" and "barn" is not only an opinion but also an insult. Many of your traffic here still ISP members. As a moderator,do you tolerate insults???? His comments are directed at a group (or community) not at admins.

And I think you are being a little unfair to the intelligence of ISP members. Not everyone is walking around with dastmal yazdi over there.

And to stand up to these arazel and obash individually as you suggested, would be exactly what they want. Trashing your site. What they could not accomplish with ISP.

As a moderator or owner of this site, do you really want ISP members to come here and dahan be dahan with these guys?

And one more thing.

There is a protocol in moderating of a web site.No matter how bad things are, generally , more mature sites do not allow bad mouthing of other communities.


Barn and tavileh are not the only means of expression to express a criticism.If one was not disengenious, there would have been more critical approaches within reach to relay the same message.

to approve such an approach ,surprizes me.

Behrou Jon
I don't think is a strange question. Very simple. Calling a community "tavileh" and "barn" is not only an opinion but also an insult. Many of your traffic here still ISP members. As a moderator,do you tolerate insults???? His comments are directed at a group (or community) not at admins.


Aram jaan, I'm not a moderator here and never have been. The determination of what is an insult and what type of insult requires action, is not as simple as you make it out to be. For example, Mr. T's comment about muslims could be perceived as being much more insulting to a much larger group than what you are concerned about here. As such, it was necessary upon the inception of this site, to set up rules that would maximize freedom of expression and minimize the type of "subjective" moderating that was going on at ISP (the reason most of us are here).

The rules were carefully worded in that context and have been posted (in the Generic Corner) since the start and should apply equally to everyone and every situation. If you believe a rule has been broken, you can simply report the post (by pressing the exclamation mark on the top right hand side of each post) and it will automatically generate a discussion in the team forum for the moderators. Please be as specific in your reporting of the detail (e.g. this passage breaks rule X of the site).

I'm not sure why this is a questionable version of democracy where our input on the rules has been welcomed from the beginning and they've always been subject to the collective opinion of this forum, each one of us can simply take action by pressing a button and everything is up for discussion and change. I don't know of any democracies where you don't even have to press a button and your representatives simply read your mind! ;)


And I think you are being a little unfair to the intelligence of ISP members. Not everyone is walking around with dastmal yazdi over there.


That's not what I meant Aram jaan. What I meant was that the IC team would be walking around with a dastmal-yazdi if they were to take action (without a post even being reported), everytime someone said something about ISP, its members or its owners that could be considered insulting by someone somewhere.


And to stand up to these arazel and obash individually as you suggested, would be exactly what they want. Trashing your site. What they could not accomplish with ISP.


Personally, I think that ISP managed to trash their own site and they did that and are doing that, by using double standards in applying the rules. The exact same thing the IC team doesn't want to do, because once you open that can of warms for so and so, it's a free for all.


As a moderator or owner of this site, do you really want ISP members to come here and dahan be dahan with these guys?

I'm neither the moderator nor the owner of this site Aram jaan. Moderation duties are carried out in a team (soon to be picked through an elective process) and everyone is the owner of this site (i.e. IC is a non-profit entity, operating solely on danations from people - anyone and everyone's name can be added to the domain registration information with zero resistance - in fact the more shared the liability, the better for everyone). I'm a little surprised you've been here for so long and haven't figured this stuff out yet. Everything on this site, from the Team itself to how things run, to the rules, to the overall structure of the site is up for discussion and improvment through a democratic process. Everything. But like in any other democracy, it requires ACTION.

I'm honestly starting to think that when some of you guys talk about democracy for Iran on these forums, you are envisioning a system that starts out perfect, remains perfect without any action from its citizens, and that every decision and every part of its laws will serve the individual opinions of every citizen! A paradise, where you don't even need to press a button to have your vote and opinions count!!!

After reading that, which one do you think is more questionable Aram jaan? ;)

Well a democracy needs involvement of its members, I understand some people might not like moderating or think its too much work or whatever, but that reluctance is the same reason why we have had to keep to same team for so long. Critique is well received and we will ofcourse try to handle an act on that and will listen and give our reasons and explanations, but it would also be apreciated if action would be taken by members and actively helping us out. What IZ mentioned by not wanting to have to change his aproach is understandable since one doesnt have full freedom to do/say everything they want when they are admins or moderators, one has to act on accordence to the rules, be as unbiased as possible in their aproach and for it to be a democracy the big decisions will rely on the choice of the majority of the tem. Thats one of the reasons behrou is not happy cause getting your idea through isnt a certainty, the same has happened to one of my ideas/actions but the team decisions always try to do the best for the site.

On the comments on ISP Aram jan I dont know if you mean the whole thread or one person and insult in particular, the thread itself I do not like but the team decided that despite some negative points such a platform was needed and was functional. There have been insults against persons who at the time werent or still arent members of the site or in some cases insults towards ISP or its staff in general, from the start we discussed ( I think the team discussion forum didnt even exist then and we did it out in the open not sure though) how we were gonna deal with insults and where we were going to draw the line, we decided to go against limiting speach to much, like behrou mentioned with religious figures or whatever, that the line was with insults against members of our own site. At times we can take action if it isnt a member of our own site if the moderators see it and think it needs moderating or when a member reports something and the team finds the claim subficient and takes action. We arent necessarily here to please or defend ISP and I do not see why over other sites or religions or whoever, ISP should be an exeption? The ones "bad mouthing" ISP are mostly their own members comming here to vent and the critique comes from their own members and I dont think you mean the "bad mouthing" of another i site like pfdc doesnt happen at Isp? However again if one feels something is wrong with a post and its breaking a rule, bring it under the attention of the team by reporting the post and stating your reason/explaining the report.

On another note im eating a good plate of Baghale Ghatogh ba mast and am going for seconds, sadly havent got enough for thirds :(, jatoon khali :Notooth2:

I think Aram is referring to "happy national Nuclear day" thread by chief. I agree that chief's language is distasteful and ugly. I guess I should have said something to admins so they can edit that, when I saw it.

I am all for civilized criticism and discussions. But not sure about tavileh and stuff of this nature.

Now, kaesra jan azaar dari ? right at our lunch time you talk about baghali gadogh?

Man daram inja yek sandwich cold turkey sagh mizanam, Fekr ma ra ham bekon. eybaba :-)

I think Aram is referring to "happy national Nuclear day" thread by chief. I agree that chief's language is distasteful and ugly. I guess I should have said something to admins so they can edit that, when I saw it.

I am all for civilized criticism and discussions. But not sure about tavileh and stuff of this nature.

Now, kaesra jan azaar dari ? right at our lunch time you talk about baghali gadogh?

Man daram inja yek sandwich cold turkey sagh mizanam, Fekr ma ra ham bekon. eybaba :-)

FZ jan, I did respond to him in that thread and warned him about his language. I will check it out and edit his post also. Thanks to Aram for reporting it, although if it is done through the report button it will get our attention faster.

I think Aram is referring to "happy national Nuclear day" thread by chief. I agree that chief's language is distasteful and ugly. I guess I should have said something to admins so they can edit that, when I saw it.

I am all for civilized criticism and discussions. But not sure about tavileh and stuff of this nature.

Now, kaesra jan azaar dari ? right at our lunch time you talk about baghali gadogh?

Man daram inja yek sandwich cold turkey sagh mizanam, Fekr ma ra ham bekon. eybaba :-)
Ok didnt know he was speaking about that post thought it might have been another post in this thread or this thread in general, but thats why I mentioned reporting posts so we can take a look and take care of it.

Bebakhsh mano agha, I cant be silent when I'm eating Baghali Ghatogh, people need to know :D I love that dish, I could have used more discretion though, hope you enjoyed your sandwich :D ;)

Bebakhsh mano agha, I cant be silent when I'm eating Baghali Ghatogh, people need to know :D I love that dish, I could have used more discretion though, hope you enjoyed your sandwich :D ;)

Dude, to keh shomali nisti, baaghaali ghatogh az koja yaad gerefti? :dunno:

Ki mighe shomali nistam, familiye mamanam gilaki hastan, baghali ghatogh too khoon-ameh, harchanwaghta khalam az iran baram Baghalisho mifrestan, man az gazahaye irani faghat Gheimeh o Baghali Ghatogh khodam Baladam dorost bekonam, wali mikham bishtar yad begiram, dashtpokhtam wali bad nist. Engad az baghali ghatogh harf mizanam, akse gilan o post mikonam wa ahangaye Gilaki post mikonam maro hanooz Shomali nemishnasi, whats a man gotta do http://www.iraniancorner.net/images/smilies/Artless%20Smilies/dunno.gif I dont speak the language though, understand it to a degree but dont get to hear it that much here in holland to learn more though, but from my time in Iran I remember gilan most and from what I have seen it might be the most beautifull place in the world or alteast a good contender.

Fair enough, Ramin jan. But let's say we give them a chance and ban them later, what's going to stop them from coming back as you said? We're not really solving that problem by waiting.

What I like about the instant ban is the message it sends: This is not a troll playground like ISP. Don't even waste your time.


.

Well then you and i are pretty much saying the same thing. The only difference is the small difference in the kind of message that is being sent.

By banning them immediately were sending a message that trolls (which in this case would be defined as anyone who trolls or who has shown to be a troll in the past in other communities) will not be tolerated.

Waiting for them to break the rules before we ban them sends the message that the rules in this community will be followed, and that therefore trolling (as defined and laid out in plain english in the forum rules) will not be tolerated. I personally like this second message because it affirms the importance of the forum rules and it allows for a more concrete definition of trolling.

In either case the troll will most likely come back, but i think that in the latter the troll will be more hesitant in blatantly trolling, and will resort to part-time trolling (which i hope most of us can live with because like i said before this is an issue that is impossible to get rid of all together).

I brought up the decency issue to address the friendly reception and show of respect I was seeing toward the bozos. Just wanted to make sure my friends don't allow these vermin to take advantage of their good nature
I don't think that our friends here were doing any such thing. They were just having a little bit of fun. Not my idea of fun, but hey, to each their own.

^ Read the posts again, aziz. Chief was being asked for his 'political input', as if a cockroach is capable of having an opinion.

LOL

And to stand up to these arazel and obash individually as you suggested, would be exactly what they want. Trashing your site. What they could not accomplish with ISP.

Why are you guys still talking bout ISP?

^ Read the posts again, aziz. Chief was being asked for his 'political input', as if a cockroach is capable of having an opinion.

IZ jan,
The same way we expect every member to be polite and respectful of all the other members, we expect you to be respectful also. We would like to get everyone to follow the rules of forum and if there is any violation we will deal with it.
It is possible that your opinion has been formed based on posts you have seen of these people on ISP, I know Chief was a supporter of IRI but haven't followed his posts that closely to know if he qualifies as a troll or not.
Not everyone has been following them that closely to form an opinion as strong as yours.
So, until we see such behaviour here, we consider him a member of this site and expect them to be respected.
Even if you see violations from any member, please refrain from posting insults in their response and just report the post. we will make sure they are dealt with.

IZ jan,
The same way we expect every member to be polite and respectful of all the other members, we expect you to be respectful also. We would like to get everyone to follow the rules of forum and if there is any violation we will deal with it.
It is possible that your opinion has been formed based on posts you have seen of these people on ISP, I know Chief was a supporter of IRI but haven't followed his posts that closely to know if he qualifies as a troll or not.
Not everyone has been following them that closely to form an opinion as strong as yours.
So, until we see such behaviour here, we consider him a member of this site and expect them to be respected.
Even if you see violations from any member, please refrain from posting insults in their response and just report the post. we will make sure they are dealt with.
I'm sorry but what was the point of making IC then?

This is turning into the same lines pooya used to sing for us everytime someone questioned the presence of trolls like dalghak, chief member of day, etc...

For as long as you let someone like Chief, or GP establish their presence on this forum, then IC will be no different than ISP.


Let em post under different names, let em troll all they want, but don't give em the legitimacy of holding on to one personality. They are usernames, nothing more.

PJ jan, I've already written extensively about his activities on Twitter and the disgusting drivel he would write about Neda on a regular basis.

I don't take him seriously in any way, shape or form, but I do see and address him as what he is: A damaged badbakht and a run of the mill internet troll working out his issues through politics. And I can't pretend to not know this just because he's been accepted as a member, when his track record is well known to most people here.

If that breaks the rules, by all means, feel free to edit my posts or ban me, but I've never had roodarvaasi with parasites and I can't pretend to be civil to scum just because some people here may not know what the guy stands for. This goes far beyond forum etiquette for me.

I'm sorry but what was the point of making IC then?

This is turning into the same lines pooya used to sing for us everytime someone questioned the presence of trolls like dalghak, chief member of day, etc...

For as long as you let someone like Chief, or GP establish their presence on this forum, then IC will be no different than ISP.


Let em post under different names, let em troll all they want, but don't give em the legitimacy of holding on to one personality. They are usernames, nothing more.

I didn't have any problem with Pooya's posts. My problem was that when people complained about them it would either be ignored or would cause a minimal ban for them, while when they complained other members would get long bans.
The other issue was that they would delete entire threads with long meaningful discussions when just one of the trolls started cursing at another one.
We have had the forum rules for such a long time and no one has given us feedback on it. Now that we ask people to respect the rules they say don't follow the rules and follow what I want. In the interest of clarity and sanity of our mods we need to stick to "some" set of rules and treat all the members equally, don't you think?
Let's put aside any tarof. I will open a thread and ask everyone to put in their ideas of what the rules should look like. Don't be shy and let us know what makes sense.
Should we ban everyone who is pro IRI?
Should we ban everyone who doesn't agree with the majority?
Should we ban everyone based on old history? If so, should old history be digged to show evidence to everyone?
Should we make representative and trust his judgement about who should be banned and who should not?
I don't know about anyone else, but I am open to any suggestion.

Wetret agha difference is at ISP they had been doing it for a while and steps werent taken, they havent been here for that long and if/when they break rules they will be taken care of, what we are saying is that we cant/shouldnt ban them/take action before they actually do anything against the rules, what is the point of rules if we are gonna judge everything without actual basis and solely on our dislike of them, its not like we are protecting them, we are protecting the rules and having some order in the way decisions are made.

There is nothing wrong with having these discussion, we arent shoving them away, we are adressing them and try to explain our actions, however it would help if some of the members that seem to solely post in this thread would also post in other threads. Do you guys really think things have been fucked up by them? What has been done that goes beyond the lines set? Arent you guys yourself causing more drama than them, drawing away activity from other threads and isnt that what they would want, I know in most of your cases its for the better of the site, but just saying arent you guys overreacting to what they have "caused"? Dont get me wrong I am not saying these discussion shoudnt take place and am not trying to silence anyone, just havent seen what they have caused other than causing contreversy by their presence alone wich we also know is something they want and the reason they chose for those usernames. But seriously at isp people were unhappy that after clear trolling nothing was done, we are saying that if they repeat their actions, show it to us and we will take action if its against site rules. Let us atleast try to take care of it if it hapens, not saying we dont do anything against it when it hasnt happened yet.

In hindsight maybe we should have initially put up a restriction for these usernames, not screening all members just ban certain names for use on this site, before they sign up so you wont judge someone who actually registered, but we hadnt thought of that and that would have been difficult bc wich usernames would you have to choose and where do you draw the line and its an action not taken and bc the discussion about this idea has never been it might not have been the right action anyway. Currently the ideas implementation is too late since those names with the most contreversy have already signed up and when we allowed that, we allowed them to be treated on their actions and with the rest not everyone would agree if they would be on that list or not. I still think its best to treat everyone on their actions and based on a set ogf rules and not solely subjectivelyn and I think I might have opposed the idea apart from maybe 2 usernames anyway, not sure.

I know what they could cause and we need help with dealing with moderation anyway, but havent heard alot of people yet willing to actually actively help the site. If you think there are posts that go against the rules and think would negatively effect the site, report it. If they do something they'll be taken care of, we dont want them to bring this site down either, but their actions will be judged, and I know I somewhat sound like a broken record.

PJ jan, I've already written extensively about his activities on Twitter and the disgusting drivel he would write about Neda on a regular basis.

I don't take him seriously in any way, shape or form, but I do see and address him as what he is: A damaged badbakht and a run of the mill internet troll working out his issues through politics. And I can't pretend to not know this just because he's been accepted as a member, when his track record is well known to most people here.

If that breaks the rules, by all means, feel free to edit my posts or ban me, but I've never had roodarvaasi with parasites and I can't pretend to be civil to scum just because some people here may not know what the guy stands for. This goes far beyond forum etiquette for me.

IZ jan, I am sorry, which twitter? I am not following twitter. I would love to see it. Maybe you don't have to put up with him much longer if you bring the level of awareness of everyone, so that everyone is on the same page. It was not until recently that we got a bunch of trolls on this site. There are a few of them that are clearly trolls. We have gotten rid of some and if others show up we will take care of them. There are others who have been supporting IRI, should that be ground to ban them? Maybe
Maybe we need to be that blunt in our rules, so that it is clear for everyone who should be a member and who should not. Otherwise it becomes opinion based moderation and khar too khar.
Or maybe we just need to close the doors to public and make the site invitation only. I am open to that too. But let's decide on that. I don't feel any attachments to the rules that we have. In fact when we made up those rules I predicted that they are not going to hold up when general public starts coming in. But when we wrote those rules we didn't have that many users and those rules were fine until certain others started to come in.
Behrou also asked for something like this last week. I think it is time we make it happen.

Yeah Im ok with that too Pj, I think these rules were also setup at a time were we didnt have the team discussion forum and it was in the open, but then there werent that many members yet and we wanted a basis to begin with. I keep stressing though that we are also short handed and if we would just create a big enough pool of people helping out we could deal with things more efficiently.

Ok I have not come up with any solution and this is not necessarily my opinion. However few people that i have been in touch @ ISP, they all had reservation coming here because of Chief and Timsar. Again I am not saying to break any rule to make members happy..

Can we put a Vote up for this just to see out of curiosity what members feel?

Just to make me understand this better ( sorry I am daft) so the argument is we should not have GP and Chief here because of their behavior at ISP?

Wetret agha difference is at ISP they had been doing it for a while and steps werent taken, they havent been here for that long and if/when they break rules they will be taken care of, what we are saying is that we cant/shouldnt ban them/take action before they actually do anything against the rules, what is the point of rules if we are gonna judge everything without actual basis and solely on our dislike of them, its not like we are protecting them, we are protecting the rules and having some order in the way decisions are made.

There is nothing wrong with having these discussion, we arent shoving them away, we are adressing them and try to explain our actions, however it would help if some of the members that seem to solely post in this thread would also post in other threads. Do you guys really think things have been fucked up by them? What has been done that goes beyond the lines set? Arent you guys yourself causing more drama than them, drawing away activity from other threads and isnt that what they would want, I know in most of your cases its for the better of the site, but just saying arent you guys overreacting to what they have "caused"? Dont get me wrong I am not saying these discussion shoudnt take place and am not trying to silence anyone, just havent seen what they have caused other than causing contreversy by their presence alone wich we also know is something they want and the reason they chose for those usernames. But seriously at isp people were unhappy that after clear trolling nothing was done, we are saying that if they repeat their actions, show it to us and we will take action if its against site rules. Let us atleast try to take care of it if it hapens, not saying we dont do anything against it when it hasnt happened yet.

In hindsight maybe we should have initially put up a restriction for these usernames, not screening all members just ban certain names for use on this site, before they sign up so you wont judge someone who actually registered, but we hadnt thought of that and that would have been difficult bc wich usernames would you have to choose and where do you draw the line and its an action not taken and bc the discussion about this idea has never been it might not have been the right action anyway. Currently the ideas implementation is too late since those names with the most contreversy have already signed up and when we allowed that, we allowed them to be treated on their actions and with the rest not everyone would agree if they would be on that list or not. I still think its best to treat everyone on their actions and based on a set ogf rules and not solely subjectivelyn and I think I might have opposed the idea apart from maybe 2 usernames anyway, not sure.

I know what they could cause and we need help with dealing with moderation anyway, but havent heard alot of people yet willing to actually actively help the site. If you think there are posts that go against the rules and think would negatively effect the site, report it. If they do something they'll be taken care of, we dont want them to bring this site down either, but their actions will be judged, and I know I somewhat sound like a broken record.
Kasra jan, first of all let me say that I meant no disrespect with my previous post.

I'm also a little bit annoyed by the number of posts in this thread, while there are other threads that need to be discussed, and yea, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the energy wasted on discussing GP's mom and Chief's childhood could be used for something better.

We all know what these guys are here for, so spear us the ''they haven't done anything wrong here'' excuse. They know what they've achieved in ISP. Their only intention is to disturb the peace. The very reason why they post here is because nothings going on at ISP now a days, and they feel IC will be turn out to become a bigger and stronger community than ISP was.

IMO, you should use the ISP experience and stop em before they establish themself as regular members of this community.

Ok I have not come up with any solution and this is not necessarily my opinion. However few people that i have been in touch @ ISP, they all had reservation coming here because of Chief and Timsar. Again I am not saying to break any rule to make members happy..

Can we put a Vote up for this just to see out of curiosity what members feel?

Just to make me understand this better ( sorry I am daft) so the argument is we should not have GP and Chief here because of their behavior at ISP?

FZ jan,
I doubt that is the reason and I think they are just using that as an excuse. If they were regulars here and they would stop posting within the last week or so, or if ISP had banned Timsar (instead of inviting him to the exclusive club) I would have bought that reason. Timsar and Chief and a bunch of others were part of ISP for years and despite all the infractions their opponents claim, didn't get more than a couple of weeks of ban here and there. Timsar has been in our moderation queue since that personal threat and we have the majority of votes among the IC team to ban him permanently, but the couple of people who voted against perm ban are arguing that we are trying to ban him because of the political situation that some members have created here, that "if you don't ban him I am not going to come here".
Frankly, regardless of what happens to Timsar and Chief here, why do we make these characters so much bigger than they are? Why do we give them so much more attention than they deserve?
I have already opened a thread about what should be the rules of this site. I have no problem if the majority decides that we want a private and by invitation only forum. But as long as we are public, we need to find a way to coexist, defend against and prevail against the IRI agents (if we think that's what they are). Let's assume tomorrow there is a revolution. Do you think the victor should kill all the mozdoors or run them out of town?
I don't think that is even possible. So many of them are hiding already. This kind of people exists in any society. We need to define rules to protect others and make sure the rules are enforced. Otherwise, they have already won the battle.

^ Read the posts again, aziz. Chief was being asked for his 'political input', as if a cockroach is capable of having an opinion.

IZ i don't think the question was a serious one. It seemed to me more of a case of a lion playing with its food.

Kasra jan, first of all let me say that I meant no disrespect with my previous post.

I'm also a little bit annoyed by the number of posts in this thread, while there are other threads that need to be discussed, and yea, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the energy wasted on discussing GP's mom and Chief's childhood could be used for something better.

We all know what these guys are here for, so spear us the ''they haven't done anything wrong here'' excuse. They know what they've achieved in ISP. Their only intention is to disturb the peace. The very reason why they post here is because nothings going on at ISP now a days, and they feel IC will be turn out to become a bigger and stronger community than ISP was.

IMO, you should use the ISP experience and stop em before they establish themself as regular members of this community.

Wet jan, I second what PJ said on the issue that others may decide not to join because of some of the new members, as far as I am concerned that's fine. First of all, I don’t think that’s the case and hope people have more common sense than that. In the real world you don’t pick your neighbors, co-workers, etc. You may choose not to engage or socialize with them but you can’t chose who they should/shouldn’t be.

FZ jan, if there are actually some potential new members that are hesitant to join because of existing members, I have to say that’s a very short sighted view of reality and IMO they can stay where they are.

FZ jan, if there are actually some potential new members that are hesitant to join because of existing members, I have to say that’s a very short sighted view of reality and IMO they can stay where they are.
Arti jan, I think we need to distinguish between cases where there is "dislike" due to petty reasons like sports rivalries or differences of opinion, and situations where there are issues of principles and concerns about suspicious behavior.

It's interesting that in all the forums I've ever been on, only 3 have been willing to alienate the majority of their membership by remaining passive to shady characters. And all three sites have been Iranian.:)

I think this stems from the fact that we've become sensitive about issues like 'inclusiveness' and 'tolerance' for obvious and understandable reasons. But this also leads us to overdo things in many cases.

When a person's overall character and pattern of behavior just doesn't sit well with a large portion of the membership to the point that it threatens the harmony of the community and chases away potential new members, it's perfectly reasonable to get rid of said individual. In fact, I've seen this exact thing happen numerous times on non-Iranian forums and the boards have benefited from it.

Honestly, if I was an Admin and it came down to accepting proven trolls at the risk of losing someone like Agha Shojaa and others like him, I wouldn't even have to think about it. It's a no brainer.

Arti jan, I think we need to distinguish between cases where there is "dislike" due to petty reasons like sports rivalries or differences of opinion, and situations where there are issues of principles and concerns about suspicious behavior.

It's interesting that in all the forums I've ever been on, only 3 have been willing to alienate the majority of their membership by remaining passive to shady characters. And all three sites have been Iranian.:)

I think this stems from the fact that we've become sensitive about issues like 'inclusiveness' and 'tolerance' for obvious and understandable reasons. But this also leads us to overdo things in many cases.

When a person's overall character and pattern of behavior just doesn't sit well with a large portion of the membership to the point that it threatens the harmony of the community and chases away potential new members, it's perfectly reasonable to get rid of said individual. In fact, I've seen this exact thing happen numerous times on non-Iranian forums and the boards have benefited from it.

Honestly, if I was an Admin and it came down to accepting proven trolls at the risk of losing someone like Agha Shojaa and others like him, I wouldn't even have to think about it. It's a no brainer.

IZ jan,
Kazem roo cheshe ma ja dare har moghe ke tashrif biyare inja. He has known about us for a long time, pretty much from the beginning, and other than a few posts he had at the beginning, he disappeared and then last week he showed up to say that he doesn't come here because we have created a safe heaven for the trolls. We didn't have any trolls until that same week, and we are far from ISP as far as trolls go. The same character that he is objecting to, is part of their exclusive members club, and yet he posts there.
I mean if he doesn't want to post here, that is one thing, but why would he say something like that?
Besides, I have opened a thread about any suggestions that you guys have, and nobody other than the IC team has posted anything there. You guys are very active in this thread, if you really care about this site, why don't you give us your suggestions? It is not like we are saying tough it up and deal with it. We are giving you rish and gheychi. Why don't you guys tell us what you think?

^ PJ jan, your points are taken, but I was just using Kazem as an example. Personally if the two clowns were here from the beginning, I doubt I would have left ISP. Because one of my main gripes was their refusal to acknowledge the truth about these two, particularly the pedo.

Having said that, my input in the reform thread would be pretty much what I said in the earlier post. Maybe you can move the post to that thread.

well all were trying to do is to set up a systamatic way to deal with this. were not interested in having any kind of trolls here. it has nothing to do with inclusiveness or tolerance. were just trying to figure out the best way to deal with a problem that is not ever fully going to go away.

We just want to work with a system so the decisions have strong grounds on wich they can fall back on, I think if you could formulate a new rule, IZ or anyone else, that could be posted in the reform thread, as discribing and clear as possible, if it has enough support in that thread a poll can be posted and if the mayority feels the same the new rule could be passed and we could act based on that rule. Just formulate your objections/critique to a new rule that could deal with the critique. Like Ramin said all we want is a systematic way of dealing with things, I dont think thats a strange desire.

Having a system in place is perfectly fine, but there are times when you have to use your discretion. And there is nothing wrong with that when you have the backing of most people on board. As I said earlier, I've seen this happen on many forums with clear, elaborate moderating systems.

We are trying to formulate a rule that could do just that, we'll put it up in the reform thread, its not that we cant do anything without the rule, I just think it is better if a rule is also at place.

Maybe something along the lines of "Trolling is strictly prohibited and trolls will be banned at the discretion of the IC team. IC reserves the right to ban anyone who is deemed a troll and anyone of whom the team feels would affect the site negatively" Its not fully worked out though IMO and could probably be better formulated.

Maybe something along the lines of "Trolling is strictly prohibited and trolls will be banned at the discretion of the IC team".

That's good enough for me.

IZ jaan, as valid as your arguments may be and I agree with much of what you're saying, I hope that you can also agree with me that all our times would be better spent in discussing what this site CAN BE rather than what it SHOULD NOT BE.

As Rasoul jaan said in another thread, we Iranians are very vocal about what don't want, but seldom express what we do want. That problem is not limited to this forum or out there. It is a cultural issue we do need to get resolved.

As such, I hope that everyone will chip in and contribute to the CAN BE and SHOULD BE, rather than CAN NOT's and SHOULT NOT's. That includes agha Kazeme gol. :)

What da?!

What da?!
Mr, G.

Ya, I noticed that yesterday and I was going to ask about it. First it said forum is down for maintenance then switched to "This account is suspended"(?) and now it says It'll be back on May 5th.

خوب الحمدوللله مثل اینکه در طویله بسته شد
تکبیر......هه هه هه

after they arrest him in kuwait group of his band attacking iranian sites
they attcked iransportspress

خوب الحمدوللله مثل اینکه در طویله بسته شد
تکبیر......هه هه هه

I had warned you once. Now you are in moderation queue until your fate is decided. Thanks for the report Behrou jan.

Agha, can you please keep these useless threads under "All Discussions Related To Other Sites/Characters".

Ali Lawa I think a good warning is at is at place, so consider my post a warning. Limit these kinda posts to the "all discussions related to other sites" and try to have post with atleast some base backing it, you seem obsessed with gp and we arent that interested.

sorry dude

Its just more work for us cause we have to move/merge these threads with that one, we have told you this before.

sorry kaesra I want to apologize to you and others

No problem, just post other site related stuff (gp/isp) here and it will take away uneccesary work from us, thanks for understanding ali agha

Is this a joke or was GP really arrested??

Is this a joke or was GP really arrested??

Who knows. There are some rumours that he single handedly orchestrated the Greek financial crisis and working on the Euro one as a precursor to the coming of the Big EZ!!! ;)

With his 250 IQ I seriously would not doubt it.

LOL. Wasm't it his 7 year old niece that harnessed nuclear energy in her basement or something? These guys come from a lineage of pure geniuses - or it is genii? I guess fingilisi bekhaim begim hamashoon Jeninan!!! ;)