NationStates Jolt Archive

Poll: Are you a member of the Spam Brigade?! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518325)

Honestly, had I known that I would be quoted, I would have come up with a better “title” for their little group. Anyway, while you’ll struggle to find a post that isn’t spam in that thread, certain posts by certain people yet again flaunt their devotion to breaking forums rules. :rolleyes:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12338397&postcount=5
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12338436&postcount=9
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12338470&postcount=23
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12338557&postcount=40
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12338571&postcount=43
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12338583&postcount=44

…etc. Don’t feel like reading through more pages…and I think everyone gets the point. Me thinks it’s not a wise idea to make an entire thread of spam mocking a moderator’s advice (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12339582&postcount=8) no to spam so much.

…etc. Don’t feel like reading through more pages…and I think everyone gets the point. Me thinks it’s not a wise idea to make an entire thread of spam mocking a moderator’s advice (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12339582&postcount=8) no to spam so much.

...though you might note that the thread was made half a day before the moderator gave his advice.

Thread made: Today, 12:48 AM
Post made: Today, 1:59 PM

Just sayin'

Steel... not to make a jab at you or anyone, but what is the harm of this kind of spam. sure it fluff, but it's fun fluff that rarely breaks down to trolling/flamebaiting and what not. now a plethora of this kind of threads is a different matter, but the occasional thread can actually help people "step back" and calm down from other, more voiltile threads.

hey.. perhaps a study to the benefits of the occasional spam thread... :p

Me thinks it’s not a wise idea to make an entire thread of spam mocking a moderator’s advice (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12339582&postcount=8) not to spam so much.

Another point is that since this thread you reported in started before the mod made the suggestion, I think it can be considered a misrepresentation of the intent to "mock" a mod's suggestion, or an attempt to get a thread shut down by inferring that it was made just to "Mock" the mod's.

Me thinks it’s not a wise idea to make an entire thread of spam mocking a moderator’s advice (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12339582&postcount=8) no to spam so much.
Yes, especially not when the mocking comes before the advice. Very unwise.

To save you some time and effort and to balance your rather lopsided view of which posters make spam threads, here are all the other threads currently on the first three (default setting) pages of General I found that should qualify as spam:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518233
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518369
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518356
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518132
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518380
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518337
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518276
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518263
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518379
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518234
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518386
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=392194
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518301
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518366
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518308
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518290


To clarify: I think the thread the OP is reporting is certainly spam, most posts in it are of the more obnoxious kind of smiley spam, too.

While Il Ruffino is by far not the worst offender in this regard, he is still as much subject to the rules of the forum as any other poster, so I highly doubt he would take exception to spammy threads of his being moved to Spam or Chat or locked by Moderation, judging, if nothing else, from the fact that he never came to Moderation to complain about anything of the sort before.

I assume, though, that he did very much take exception to the OP's description (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12337188&postcount=18) of him as being „worshipped“ and „fluffled“ by his „little NSG clique“ in a „[c]elebration of spammers. Truly rather pathetic.“ Quite out of the blue, really, considering that the OP has been able to come to this conclusion in the surprisingly short time he has been frequenting General and that none of the other regular users has ever so much as insinuated anything like that, probably because it's patently inane.

To be dubbed „The Lord of the Spam“ (seriously?) by the OP and, especially, to just as quickly be labelled „self-proclaimed royalty“ by Frisbeeteria (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12339582&postcount=8) - even though the latter asserts that he doesn't "sit around reading General and following" said "self-proclaimed royalty" but "only stick[s] [his] head in the door when somebody posts about it here" - is insulting and from reading his post in the other Moderation thread that is what he was talking about. Not being an "emo kid" because a spammy thread got locked.

Well, to be fair, Steel does tend to get ahead of himself (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=461905) now and then or miss things like pertinent details in his enthusiastic (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=422141) ongoing (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518396) crusade (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518322) to clean (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518003) the forums (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517725) of spam (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517083) and the like (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517703) ever (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517058) since (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=516252) he reappeared (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=515639) on the scene (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=515416), and having summarily been spanked (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514686) for doing the same thing (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514673) he’s on everyone else’s case about nowadays.

I don't know. Maybe he isn't getting enough hugs or something.

...though you might note that the thread was made half a day before the moderator gave his advice.

Thread made: Today, 12:48 AM
Post made: Today, 1:59 PM

Just sayin'

Oy! My mistake.

Still, spam is spam

Well, to be fair, Steel does tend to get ahead of himself (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=461905) now and then or miss things like pertinent details in his enthusiastic (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=422141) ongoing (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518396) crusade (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518322) to clean (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518003) the forums (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517725) of spam (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517083) and the like (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517703) ever (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=517058) since (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=516252) he reappeared (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=515639) on the scene (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=515416), and having summarily been spanked (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514686) for doing the same thing (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514673) he’s on everyone else’s case about nowadays.

I don't know. Maybe he isn't getting enough hugs or something.

Come now, Nathi. One would think you're above that sort of thing. Not enough hugs? You can do better. :rolleyes:

As for the 14 threads of mine that you linked to, including one from 2006 and this one that we're currently posting in, I fail to see how the rate of my reports or even a few reports against me have absolutely anything to do with this validity this individual case. Further, I fail to see the reason for them to be posted here other than for antagonism.

I invite anyone to report me to moderation if I break the rules. It's happened before, and who knows, it might happen again. It's the job of every poster on this site to report rule infractions. Getting on my case for doing so is just...eh...ridiculous, and has been repremanded by mods previously.

I've never denied posting quite a bit in Moderation. I think that's fairly obvious. Still, as I said, the fact that I post a lot of reports does not someone dimish the reports I make, nor does the fact that I have been reported myself in the past exclude me from reporting others.

This isn't some "crusade." This isn't some attack on "ruffy." Fris said himself that the mods don't have the time to scan the threads for rulebreaking. Well, lately I do. If reporting incidents weren't important, there wouldn't be an entire forum dedicated to it.

Still, I would have expected a bit more from you, Nathi. This is not about me "getting ahead of myself," "reappearing on the scene," "getting spanked," "not getting enough hugs," or whatever else you feel like posting. This is a report on spam. Nothing more...nothing less.

If you wish to report me for something (I'm interested in what it would be), make a new thread. You can post every thread I've ever made there. But this hijacking and antagonising in moderation is below you, Nathi.

Steel... not to make a jab at you or anyone, but what is the harm of this kind of spam. sure it fluff, but it's fun fluff that rarely breaks down to trolling/flamebaiting and what not. now a plethora of this kind of threads is a different matter, but the occasional thread can actually help people "step back" and calm down from other, more voiltile threads.

There's a difference, JuNii, between what I find harm in and what the site rules state. I, for instance, see no problem with nudity or "curse" words. However, if I was to post porn pictures, or say a line of obscenities, I'd be slapped down for it, as per site rules.

I'm not against the occasional light-hearted thread. If you search my posting history like Nathi does, you'll see a number of non-serious threads I've started in General. The difference between those threads, and the threads of many others, is purpose. "Are you circumsized?" (made by someone else) certainly isn't a serious topic, and yet it's purpose is quite clear. "What's your favorite 80's rock band" is hardly political debate, and yet it can inspire discussion nevertheless.

Spam, in contrast, has no purpose. Lines of smilies, "postcount +1's," or chat better reserved for AIM or IRC has no place in General. That's not saying that every thread needs to be a psychoanalysis of political theory...it's saying that there needs to be at least some "point" to a thread. Points ranging from inciteful inspirations of debate to your favorite hockey teams are fine, but " :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: " is not a point, and should not be fine.

Um, Steel? Ever heard of 'joking'? That'd be where the 'hugs' comment came from. Something I'd think would be blatantly obvious to most, but as I said - you have a tendency to miss things. Like post times when making accusations. And attempts, small as they may be, at humor.

As for the links, perhaps if you looked at the content, and not just the post dates, it might help illustrate. You've been on a bit of a kick for some time now. You've mentioned 'if I can't do it' on several occasions in Moderation and elsewhere. You seem to be harping on just a little bit now and then in your reporting (which, btw, in and of itself is not incorrect, as the Mods have said time and again - if it's against the rules, it's against the rules). It's the approach that seems to be rubbing people wrong.

Anyone's free to make observations. You don't have to like them. Perhaps before you go further with the 'antagonizing' slant, you might want to sit back and consider that. But then, we've been there before, and know full well your opinions on it. You're awfully quick on the draw when it comes to other folks, but when the tables are turned, you tend to get a little defensive and nasty about it.

If you don't like the responses you're getting on account, it might be time to sit back and reconsider the methods involved in your reporting, and further, in some instances, your motivations behind them.



EDIT: Yes, he has started several threads in General it seems. And the thrust of them seem to have appeared after he got bawled out for rather broadly dissing General in other threads and getting chewed out for his attitude about it by the Mods. History can indeed show a number of things, one supposes. And in some cases, does have bearing on topics currently at hand.

To save you some time and effort and to balance your rather lopsided view of which posters make spam threads, here are all the other threads currently on the first three (default setting) pages of General I found that should qualify as spam:

I have no such lopsided view. I report spam, not spammers. "Lord of the Spam" is an allusion to other titles having "Lord of the..." in the title. For it to be taken so seriously is beyond me, much like the "spam brigade."

To clarify: I think the thread the OP is reporting is certainly spam, most posts in it are of the more obnoxious kind of smiley spam, too.

Then what's the problem? This thread is only about that thread's spam.

While Il Ruffino is by far not the worst offender in this regard, he is still as much subject to the rules of the forum as any other poster, so I highly doubt he would take exception to spammy threads of his being moved to Spam or Chat or locked by Moderation, judging, if nothing else, from the fact that he never came to Moderation to complain about anything of the sort before.

No one, including me, is calling Il Ruffino the worse spammer there is. I'm not sure one could assign such a title. What disturbs me, and has brought Il under my radar, is the blatant disregard he and his buddies (Darknovae in particular, others...) have for spam rules. They revel in spam. That is not to be tolerated.

I assume, though, that he did very much take exception to the OP's description (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12337188&postcount=18) of him as being „worshipped“ and „fluffled“ by his „little NSG clique“ in a „[c]elebration of spammers. Truly rather pathetic.“ Quite out of the blue, really, considering that the OP has been able to come to this conclusion in the surprisingly short time he has been frequenting General and that none of the other regular users has ever so much as insinuated anything like that, probably because it's patently inane.

Surprisingly short time, eh? Buddy, I've been on NationStates since March 03, during which time I've had various levels of activity and inactivity. I've been reading and posting in General the entire time, through it's ups and downs. There is no "surprisingly short time" to speak of. Should I wait longer to call a spade a spade?

To be dubbed „The Lord of the Spam“ (seriously?) by the OP and, especially, to just as quickly be labelled „self-proclaimed royalty“ by Frisbeeteria (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12339582&postcount=8) - even though the latter asserts that he doesn't "sit around reading General and following" said "self-proclaimed royalty" but "only stick[s] [his] head in the door when somebody posts about it here" - is insulting and from reading his post in the other Moderation thread that is what he was talking about. Not being an "emo kid" because a spammy thread got locked.

Once again, you take "lord of the spam" waaaay too seriously. Still, the fact that Fris only sticks his head in the door from time to time and still manages to remember Il's antics should tell you something in itself. As for Nathi's "emo kid" picture...I hear Il's leaving NS sans the photography thread. Leaving over being repremanded for breaking the rules... :rolleyes:

There's a difference, JuNii, between what I find harm in and what the site rules state. I, for instance, see no problem with nudity or "curse" words. However, if I was to post porn pictures, or say a line of obscenities, I'd be slapped down for it, as per site rules.

I'm not against the occasional light-hearted thread. If you search my posting history like Nathi does, you'll see a number of non-serious threads I've started in General. The difference between those threads, and the threads of many others, is purpose. "Are you circumsized?" (made by someone else) certainly isn't a serious topic, and yet it's purpose is quite clear. "What's your favorite 80's rock band" is hardly political debate, and yet it can inspire discussion nevertheless.

Spam, in contrast, has no purpose. Lines of smilies, "postcount +1's," or chat better reserved for AIM or IRC has no place in General. That's not saying that every thread needs to be a psychoanalysis of political theory...it's saying that there needs to be at least some "point" to a thread. Points ranging from inciteful inspirations of debate to your favorite hockey teams are fine, but " :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: " is not a point, and should not be fine.and did you attempt to engage in conversation/discussion in those threads or just issue a "this is spam" post. which, I may add, does nothing but makes you as guilty for spamming as those you call "King of Spam" and the "Spam brigade" which is also flaiming.

Um, Steel? Ever heard of 'joking'? That'd be where the 'hugs' comment came from. Something I'd think would be blatantly obvious to most, but as I said - you have a tendency to miss things. Like post times when making accusations. And attempts, small as they may be, at humor.

No. It simply sounds like your typical drawl when dealing with me. "Oh, Steel's on a crusade!" "Oh, Steel misses everything, he's so dumb!" or "Oh, Steel didn't get enough hugs!" Forgive me for not laughing.

As for the links, perhaps if you looked at the content, and not just the post dates, it might help illustrate. You've been on a bit of a kick for some time now. You've mentioned 'if I can't do it' on several occasions in Moderation and elsewhere. You seem to be harping on just a little bit now and then in your reporting (which, btw, in and of itself is not incorrect, as the Mods have said time and again - if it's against the rules, it's against the rules). It's the approach that seems to be rubbing people wrong.

After looking at the first few I made sure to click on every link you put up just to see what was being linked to. There were only about three that were even worth noting. What approach should I take to rulebreakings, Nathi? Should I post pictures with witty comments? Should I send cute little telegrams telling the posters not to break the rules? No. I post in Moderation. You said it yourself, the reporting in and of itself isnot incorrect. The mods have said this. I know that. There is no "approach" requirement in Moderation. I don't have to be Mr. Nice Guy when reporting rulebreakers. I rub people the wrong way some times? Eh...it's nothing new...and its not my problem.

Anyone's free to make observations. You don't have to like them. Perhaps before you go further with the 'antagonizing' slant, you might want to sit back and consider that. But then, we've been there before, and know full well your opinions on it. You're awfully quick on the draw when it comes to other folks, but when the tables are turned, you tend to get a little defensive and nasty about it.

I'm just wondering why your post was necessary. Was it all meant to be a joke? Was it simply meant to undermine this report? What was it? No tables are turned, and I'm not mad. I just don't understand your reason for posting 14 threads of mine in moderation. Just to prove I report a lot? Just to show that I've gotten told to relax before? I could have told you that.

EDIT: Yes, he has started several threads in General it seems. And the thrust of them seem to have appeared after he got bawled out for rather broadly dissing General in other threads and getting chewed out for his attitude about it by the Mods. History can indeed show a number of things, one supposes. And in some cases, does have bearing on topics currently at hand.

I still feel the same way in regards to General. I always have. This is not some "new change" nathi. This is not me "coming back to the scene" as you put it. I've always reported a lot. I've always thought how I thought about general. Doesn't stop me from posting. Perhaps you're just noticing it more now...?

and did you attempt to engage in conversation/discussion in those threads or just issue a "this is spam" post. which, I may add, does nothing but makes you as guilty for spamming as those you call "King of Spam" and the "Spam brigade" which is also flaiming.

Do I post in threads which are only spam? Mostly not. If I do, it's more of a "this thread is spam" type deal, but lately I haven't even been doing that. As for the "Spam Brigade" being "flaiming," give me a break. It's a group of people who admit that they spam, and say how much they love it while they are spamming. Calling it a "spam brigade" is no different that calling a group of men who play baseball and get paid for it a "professional baseball team."

Do I post in threads which are only spam? Mostly not. If I do, it's more of a "this thread is spam" type deal, but lately I haven't even been doing that. As for the "Spam Brigade" being "flaiming," give me a break. It's a group of people who admit that they spam, and say how much they love it while they are spamming. Calling it a "spam brigade" is no different that calling a group of men who play baseball and get paid for it a "professional baseball team."Bolded proves my point. you don't add to the discussion, you don't attempt to make it into a discussion, you add a pointless post into that thread and report it because you find no point to it.

and the fact that they didn't call themselves the Spam Brigade till YOU pointed it out means you're innocent?

I do believe we've struck a nerve or three. The lad doth protest overmuch.

In any case, it's a bit hard to miss when you pop up as often as you do. *shrugs* As for commentary, take it for what it's worth. Approach does matter. And yes, you have been told as much before. I guess what the amusing thing about it all is that you seem to miss it, and just keep going on as before. Perhaps that's why some things sound familiar to you.

Your manner of reporting this one and the smug commentary about it being a 'bad idea' to supposedly mock the Moderators in a separate thread that was clearly mocking you AND made before the warning, I felt, was worth a different observation. Folks can draw their own conclusions - we all have our opinions.

And on reflection I will try and forgive your lack of laughter. Not everyone can maintain a sense of humor after all. ;)

Have a good night, Steel. *curtseys with a flourish and retreats*

Bolded proves my point. you don't add to the discussion, you don't attempt to make it into a discussion, you add a pointless post into that thread and report it because you find no point to it.

and the fact that they didn't call themselves the Spam Brigade till YOU pointed it out means you're innocent?

Ok, JuNii...this is getting a bit ridiculous. You're yelling at me for something that I said I hypothetically do. You want to play that game? Fine.

If a thread has no purpose from the beginning, such as "I feel like I should cry" or "Are you a part of the Spam Brigade?!" from Il, there is no point in trying to shape a conversation, or a point, out of it. Mods make posts in threads, being mods, that don't add to the discussion and don't attempt to make it into a discussion. Are you saying those posts are worthless?

As for your second paragraph, I'm not even going to pretend I know what you mean by that. "the fact that they didn't call themselves the Spam Brigade till YOU pointed it out means you're innocent" has absolutely nothing to do with anything we're talking about here. I'm talking about me calling them that, not them calling themselves it. In addition, that was also what you were talking about, last I checked. I called them the Spam Brigade. I could give a shit what they call themselves. Their thread wasn't reported for its title. It was reported for being spam. Also, what am I "innocent" or "guilty" of, exactly?

Your manner of reporting this one and the smug commentary about it being a 'bad idea' to supposedly mock the Moderators in a separate thread that was clearly mocking you AND made before the warning, I felt, was worth a different observation. Folks can draw their own conclusions - we all have our opinions.

Eh...I've been mocked before and I've done my bit of mocking. Mocking the mods in another thing entirely, however I realized that no mockery was reported here though, thanks to my timeframe error. Only spam.

Still, it's one thing to point out my error, as three people did I believe. It's another to link 14 of my threads in a mini tangent against me or what I do.

Have a good night, Steel

Ah well. No hard feelings, I'm sure.

I have no such lopsided view. I report spam, not spammers. "Lord of the Spam" is an allusion to other titles having "Lord of the..." in the title. For it to be taken so seriously is beyond me, much like the "spam brigade."

So we should take your reports of spam seriously, but not your reports of spammers, because a post like this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12337188&postcount=18) and thread titles like this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518396) and this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518322) don't really mean anything?
Certainly that can't be what you're trying to say.

Then what's the problem? This thread is only about that thread's spam.
Except "that thread's spam" only came about because of your remarks about that "little NSG clique", no matter what you choose or not choose to "jokingly" call it. My post above was trying to explain the basic problem leading up to the thread reported here. But, as seen below, that point was missed by you completely.

No one, including me, is calling Il Ruffino the worse spammer there is. I'm not sure one could assign such a title. What disturbs me, and has brought Il under my radar, is the blatant disregard he and his buddies (Darknovae in particular, others...) have for spam rules. They revel in spam. That is not to be tolerated. What is most striking to me about this is that General has recently been extraordinarily free of spam of the kind you described in your above post. Moreover, of all the threads you reported as spam, only a very few fall into that category, either.
At the same time, many of the worst smiley spam threads have always been moved to Spam anyway by Moderation and people seem apparently quite content to "revel in spam" there instead of in General.
In short, I'm left to wonder what is up with your sudden overeagerness for watching out for the wholesomeness of General after years of not really posting there at all?

Surprisingly short time, eh? Buddy, I've been on NationStates since March 03, during which time I've had various levels of activity and inactivity. I've been reading and posting in General the entire time, through it's ups and downs. There is no "surprisingly short time" to speak of. Should I wait longer to call a spade a spade? See above.
Even a poster that was only here for a couple of days would be fully within their rights to come here and report people for breaking forum rules.
If they make a crusade out of it, they're still fully within their rights, but they should also be prepared to be asked about why they're doing it.

Once again, you take "lord of the spam" waaaay too seriously. Still, the fact that Fris only sticks his head in the door from time to time and still manages to remember Il's antics should tell you something in itself. You know, all it tells me is that he saw Il Ruffino's post count and took a look at the "fluff" nature of most of his thread topics and decided to go ahead and patronizingly dis him with a "self-proclaimed royalty" slight that has no basis in reality whatsoever. As he would know if he spent any significant time in the threads of General, which I certainly see he can't because he has his Moderator job to attend to.

You, however, do not have a Moderator job to attend to, and you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time in the threads of General lately, so you at least should have known better than to talk about a "little NSG clique" that "worships" Il Ruffino.

Just because someone has a high post count and happens to be generally liked by most other users does not make them "worshipped" and certainly not "self-proclaimed royalty".

As for Nathi's "emo kid" picture...I hear Il's leaving NS sans the photography thread. Leaving over being repremanded for breaking the rules... :rolleyes:Funny how you must have completely missed me saying that he wasn't offended at being reprimanded for breaking the rules but at being called something he isn't. Which was really the whole point of my above post. Too bad.

Woohoo, i was quoted twice in the OP, does that mean I get a cookie for spamming?

?
... do you really want the Mods to give you something for spamming?

So we should take your reports of spam seriously, but not your reports of spammers, because a post like this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12337188&postcount=18) and thread titles like this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518396) and this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518322) don't really mean anything?
Certainly that can't be what you're trying to say.

:rolleyes: What I meant was I don't go after people, I go after individual incidents. Obviously people who spam are spammers and those spammers are the ones doing the spamming. As for the titles, I already said they mean nothing. "Spam Thread" is boring. My titles rarely are. It's really not that big of a deal, and hardly something to take so personally.

Except "that thread's spam" only came about because of your remarks about that "little NSG clique", no matter what you choose or not choose to "jokingly" call it. My post above was trying to explain the basic problem leading up to the thread reported here. But, as seen below, that point was missed by you completely.

I'm sorry[/sarcasm]...but that thread was pointless from the get-go. If he wants to know who "ruffy" is, he can send a telegram to a player who uses the nickname, or bring it up as a side-bar in a thread where it is used. It does not need a whole thread. Also, I was not the first person in that thread to be critical of Il.

What is most striking to me about this is that General has recently been extraordinarily free of spam of the kind you described in your above post. Moreover, of all the threads you reported as spam, only a very few fall into that category, either.
At the same time, many of the worst smiley spam threads have always been moved to Spam anyway by Moderation and people seem apparently quite content to "revel in spam" there instead of in General.
In short, I'm left to wonder what is up with your sudden overeagerness for watching out for the wholesomeness of General after years of not really posting there at all?

Wrong. General is never free of either spam or smilie spam. I'm not going to repeat more names from "that little clique" again and again, but claiming that General has somehow been spam free is outrageous. As for a good number of them "moving to spam anyway," well, they shouldn't have been here in the first place, and they are also moved because of reports in Moderation, like this one. Lastly, the idea that I just recently came into existance, or that I just now discovered the General forums, is ridiculous. On a site where duration really doesn't mean much, I hate to bring it up, but I was posting in General for two years before you were even a nation. My opinions on General have switched back and forth from posting there and avoiding it altogether, but I've always reported things. Always.

See above.
Even a poster that was only here for a couple of days would be fully within their rights to come here and report people for breaking forum rules.
If they make a crusade out of it, they're still fully within their rights, but they should also be prepared to be asked about why they're doing it.

Wrong. Why someone is reporting something doesn't matter at all. Scan Moderation, please. In how many threads do to OP's have to answer questions in regards to their motives in placing a report? Probably less than 1%. That being said, I'm more than willing to post responses to all of your, and other's, posts here until this thread is locked or a moderator says not to post anymore. This is no crusade. This is a simple reporting of rulebreaking. The fact that I apparently have to justify me reporting this thread is a symbol of how ridiculous things have become.

You know, all it tells me is that he saw Il Ruffino's post count and took a look at the "fluff" nature of most of his thread topics and decided to go ahead and patronizingly dis him with a "self-proclaimed royalty" slight that has no basis in reality whatsoever. As he would know if he spent any significant time in the threads of General, which I certainly see he can't because he has his Moderator job to attend to.

Wrong on both accounts. Katganistan spends quite a lot of time in General. Scolopendra spends a ton of time RPing in NationStates. Mods have time to do other things than Moderate. Second, are you claiming that Frisbeeteria flamed, aka "dissed" Il? Are you saying that his opinion was baseless, and therefore, worthless on the matter?

You, however, do not have a Moderator job to attend to, and you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time in the threads of General lately, so you at least should have known better than to talk about a "little NSG clique" that "worships" Il Ruffino.

As surprising as it may seem, I don't really spend that much time in General unless I'm in a serious debate thread. Most of my NS time is spend writing in NationStates, which takes significantly less time than posting in General or Moderation. My lifestyle as it has been the past two months allows me to be "logged in" to NationStates all day while checking it as frequently or infrequently as I desire. How any of that pertains to me "knowing better" than to insult "Lord Ruffy" is beyond me.

Just because someone has a high post count and happens to be generally liked by most other users does not make them "worshipped" and certainly not "self-proclaimed royalty".

I have a high post count as well, and while I'm not going to debate, or care, about if people like me or not, when I browse General and see that every other poll has "Ruffy" in the options, I'd say it's a little higher than a friendly liking. It's happened before, and it's happened again. Still, why any of this matters either way is, once again, seemingly beyond my understanding. :rolleyes: Il would still be a spammer if he was a newcomer or the admin of the forums. His "status" is immaterial.

Funny how you must have completely missed me saying that he wasn't offended at being reprimanded for breaking the rules but at being called something he isn't. Which was really the whole point of my above post. Too bad.

Once again, neither I, nor the rules, gives a shit about what Il was offended by. If he wants to report me for my titles, Fris for his "title," and Nathi for her kitten picture, he is more than welcome to. I'd be given no less time of day than any other report. The only thing "too bad" is that you continue to bring up Il's "feelings" in a thread about his spamming, which is the real issue at hand.

Woohoo, i was quoted twice in the OP, does that mean I get a cookie for spamming?

This is exactly the problem, and exactly what I'm talking about. "Horay...I got reported cause I'm a spammer. Spam is sooooo cool!"

Oh yeah...General's real spam-free lately. :rolleyes:

I really know I shouldn't be posting here, but I think what people are trying to tell you, Steel, is that there's a nicer way to report things. It's one thing to report rulebreaking...it's another thing to gloat about it. I can remember a couple days back when you posted in a Star Wars thread I was in...the post was real short, and something along the lines of, "You guys need to read the rules." Than you reported the thread.

Was that post neccessary? Not really, and it rubbed people the wrong way, much like your titles, such as "Lord of the Spam", do. You took it even further when, after all the members of the rp changed their homeworlds to their nation names, you still sought to have our work shut down. Frankly, I felt like you were going out of your way to destroy the thread.

Rulebreakers should be reported...but there are politer ways to do it.

I really know I shouldn't be posting here, but I think what people are trying to tell you, Steel, is that there's a nicer way to report things. It's one thing to report rulebreaking...it's another thing to gloat about it. I can remember a couple days back when you posted in a Star Wars thread I was in...the post was real short, and something along the lines of, "You guys need to read the rules." Than you reported the thread.

Was that post neccessary? Not really, and it rubbed people the wrong way, much like your titles, such as "Lord of the Spam", do. You took it even further when, after all the members of the rp changed their homeworlds to their nation names, you still sought to have our work shut down. Frankly, I felt like you were going out of your way to destroy the thread.

Rulebreakers should be reported...but there are politer ways to do it.

This is insipid, and on top of that, is the exact same discussion held two or three years ago that ended with: there is no reason for me to be nice when reporting things. I’m not antagonistic. I don’t flame. I don’t troll. I report things in moderation. The fact that people are after my methods is nothing more than them grasping at straws.

In the Star Wars thread, which you brought up, I did say something along the lines of “you guys need to read the rules” because frankly, [i]they did[i/]. There is nothing wrong with that. To be completely honest, just reporting it without their knowing would be more shady, would it not? I RP. I know how it is. I gave them a chance to adapt, and a chance to plead their case in Moderation.

That’s not gloating. “You people need to read the rules” is a statement. “YES! I GET TO REPORT YOU RULEBREAKERS!” is gloating, which I obviously did not say.

I “took it further” not to “destroy the thread” but to make sure it stayed within forum rules. Simply changing the nation’s name is a loophole of the rule at best, and a mockery of them at worst.

I’m not being “impolite.” Granted I don’t claim to be doing this happily with a huge smile on my face and encouraging words either. Newcomers I treat well. Spammers I report. There’s little “grey area.”

The fact that I am continuously being argued with in a simple spam report thread is amazing. Point me to the rule that says I have to coddle rulebreakers. Point me to the rule which says all my reports need to contain smiley faces. If I rub you, or anyone else, the wrong way, place me on Ignore and don’t pay attention. I frankly could give a shit if I rub someone the wrong way on an Internet forum, as long as I’m staying within the rules.

Jesus Christ people. Take your petty arguments elsewhere and give us a chance to review the threads. What the hell is wrong with you?

This continued sniping, mainly between those who've reported and those who've been reported for spamming needs to end now. It's getting extremely ridiculous. Steel has every right to report something if he feels it needs action. Coming into this thread, namely Zilam, among other players in previous threads that've been reported, making counter accusations, and slinging insults does absolutely nothing to the original request. Expect a round of warnings if this continued argument goes on through reported offensives in the future. Behave yourselves. Is that too much to ask?