Should people be Hidden?

Yes
50% (3 votes)
No
50% (3 votes)
Total votes: 6

Posted By

thaw
Jul 24 2005 00:56

Tags

Share

Attached files

Comments

thaw
Jul 24 2005 00:56

Why do folk come on the board as 'hidden' out of interest? Info please.

Toxictears
Jul 24 2005 01:02

How do you do that? confused

thaw
Jul 24 2005 01:06

Do what?

Toxictears
Jul 24 2005 01:12

Come on as hidden.

thaw
Jul 24 2005 01:16

No idea, ask the hidden people, which is what I am doing (provided they do not consider themselves as elites. Bound to elicit an armed response really). Or not?

Love

E JH

JoeMaguire
Jul 24 2005 01:30

Are you on about people snopping on the boards without being signed on?

Mike Harman
Jul 24 2005 08:56

No I think there's an option somewhere to allow you to login without appearing at the bottom of the page as "logged in" - it's supposed to help people avoid internet stalkers or something. If they post they aren't hidden.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Jul 24 2005 09:08

But surely that allows them to become internet stalkers?

oisleep
Jul 24 2005 12:20

i'm hidden as i don't want my name appearing at the bottom in amongst a bunch of mods/administrators

thaw
Jul 28 2005 21:41

Obviously a variety of reasons then. But oisleep, the mods admins see EVERYTHING eek including the colour of your hazel eyes.

Also, remind me of the hierarchical difference between the user rights of the Admin and the Mod - which is the top dog/cat, just so I know?

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 05:54

i've no idea what the differences is, apart from mods being coloured in green and administraters beinng coloured in red, and their being plenty of both at any given time

jack for example is coloured in red and not green, so whatever it is he does is called administrating and not moderating

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 11:31

oisleep, the reason there appears to be lots of mods, is that anyone who mods a specific forum (say the South-West forum), appears as green down the bottom, even though they're only a moderator for that forum.

For the CSG forum - nearly every CSG member is a mod on that forum, because it's more democratic innit. This also means they've turned on unregistered posting so anyone finding the forum for the first time can post on it - but they don't have to rely on one person to delete viagra adverts or whatever.

We've also set up an admin forum for the library - and anyone helping with that has to be made a moderator (in the forum software, not in practice) to be able to view and post in it. It doesn't necessarily mean they have any power at all.

Most moderators on here aren't moderators in the urban75 sense - they aren't supposed to edit posts or ban people in most cases. In the case of the library, they're simply helping us out with other parts of the site, and have no additional forum responsibilities at all.

Steven.
Jul 30 2005 18:03

Also most moderators only have power within their own forum - CSG mods for example can only moderate within their group's forum.

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 18:18
John. wrote:
CSG mods for example can only moderate within their group's forum.

how come jack was able to change a poll of mine (to call me a pedo roll eyes )which i posted in general then?

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 18:28

I wasn't aware of that, but he'd be able to do it (and I'd be able to change it back) because he's an admin, not a mod.

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 18:35
Quote:

Hence, my name appears in the shiny revolutionary red of an administrator.

grin

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 18:38
Catch wrote:
I wasn't aware of that, but he'd be able to do it (and I'd be able to change it back) because he's an admin, not a mod.

to be honest i'd prefer my posts were not interfered with full stop

pingtiao
Jul 30 2005 18:40

Yes, quite.

It won't happen again, oisleep.

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 18:43

No, it won't.

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 18:59

i think it's a bit unfair that poor old revol68 was banned for altering someone's poll to accuse them of being a pedo, but no action was taken against jack for doing exactly the same thing?

Refused
Jul 30 2005 19:01

I think oisleep should get a new hobby. wink

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 19:02

why the diversion, seemed like a fair question?

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 19:03
oisleep wrote:
i think it's a bit unfair that poor old revol68 was banned for altering someone's poll to accuse them of being a pedo, but no action was taken against jack for doing exactly the same thing?

Did you make a complaint?

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 19:04

What did you do anyway? I can't remember this.

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 19:05

on the thread at the time, i made several, i remember them being laughed off in a similar way to joeblack's were

is there a special form or something i should have filed in in triplicate or something to make it official?

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 19:06
Jack wrote:
Yes, that's exactly what I did, and it was exactly the same thing. roll eyes

are you denying you changed a poll i had posted to include an option asking people to vote on whether i was a pedo-nonce?

which to me seems pretty similar to revol changing a poll of joe black's to infer he was a pedo

Mike Harman
Jul 30 2005 19:06

Yeah it's available from our office in Nuneaton.

Refused
Jul 30 2005 19:09

At first i read that as "Nuremberg".

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 19:10

what did you do then?

oisleep
Jul 30 2005 19:51
Jack wrote:
I changed a poll to add an option that you were being whiney and needlessly stirring shit.

I really can't be arsed going into this again tho, I know you do so enjoy winding up admins, but I'm not gonna play today.

i see you included whiney & shit stirring there but didn't include the words pedo & nonce, which you clearly inserted into the poll options, how come?

i wonder why i enjoy winding up admins, when they seem to have unlimited privelages to alter a poster's posts/poll's as they see fit to pursue their own personal agenda against said poster, a normal poster does it and they get banned but an admin does it and nothing happens, i think my point is clear enough on that

and i'm so sorry that you can't feel arsed to go into why you did what you did, i'm so sorry for bringing up your abuse of privelage again, poor baby