DanS = Thread Killer - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  DanS = Thread Killer

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   DanS = Thread Killer

Mcerion posted 06-12-99 05:46 AM ET
DanS that stunt you are pulling doesn't work, but it is annoying.
DanS posted 06-17-99 02:13 PM ET
Which one?
Mcerion posted 06-18-99 03:01 AM ET
Which 2, you mean. There may be more.
DanS posted 06-18-99 10:51 AM ET
I have only killed one thread. Ever. That was a judiciously placed tag on the homophobics thread in Off-topic. Not that I objected to what was being said, rather it was because a picture of a woman giving a man a BJ was posted.
Perhaps it smacked too much of vigilante justice, I don't know. I didn't like doing it, but judged it necessary for us to continue having the privilege of html. In the Firaxis off-topic forums, for instance, both html and UBB's img tag were turned off by Stephen Lee. This may have been due to that pic being posted.
In any event, I am not a serial thread killer. If anybody with the requisite html knowledge would have wanted to "unkill" the thread, they could have done so easily. I judged that the guilty poster did not have this knowledge or would think twice before unkilling it. This judgment has been proven correct.
If you believe that I have killed more threads than that one, please list the bill of particulars. In its stead, I will accept an apology...
DanS posted 06-18-99 10:57 AM ET
I also admit to being a little miffed by you posting this topic in an area that I don't often visit and in which this topic doesn't really belong. What can be your motive, other than slander, you "pig-dog"?
MichaeltheGreat posted 06-18-99 12:27 PM ET
For what it's worth, I doubt that Stephen Lee turned off UBB and HTML due to that pic - they were turned off previously, and the pic was not removed. It's also not that difficult to tweak HTML so that formatting, etc. is allowable, but pic posting or links or what have you is not.
It doesn't make sense for someone to kill HTML due to an offending pic, and then leave the pic up, now does it?
DanS posted 06-18-99 12:41 PM ET
I'm not sure what you mean. Maybe IE renders it differently. For Netscape, the table with the posts is not displayed with the method I used (and therefore the pic is not displayed either). The whole table is killed. If I understand it correctly, IE may display the table until the tag I used is encountered but everything after that is ignored (a slower thread death). I don't know and would be interested to know.
[i]"I doubt that Stephen Lee turned off UBB and HTML due to that pic - they were turned off previously"[/i]
Even though Stephen may not have seen the pic, he has alluded to problems due to pics. I would like to keep html in the Non-SMAC forum, so I killed it.
[i]"and the pic was not removed"[/i]
Well Origin, the maintainers of this forum, may not have seen it and the Firaxians just kept mum even though they did see it (who knows?). At any rate, the picture was garbage and I would try to kill it again, if it reared its ugly head. There's a time and place for this stuff (Usenet).
DeVore posted 06-18-99 12:47 PM ET
So who gave you the right to play forum god ?
People like you are worse than the idiot who posted the pic in the first place.
/Dev
DanS posted 06-18-99 01:04 PM ET
Nobody did. And I am not a forum God. He had the power to post it. I had the power to kill it. He posted it. I killed it.
EOF
Valtyr posted 06-18-99 07:53 PM ET
I use IE 5 and I can still see the picture. After DanS' post the thread stops.
MichaeltheGreat posted 06-19-99 12:25 AM ET
When you post words like **** - prior to the file being saved on the server it runs through a little search routine to replace "undesired" words. The sysadmin can do the same thing with HTML commands, so that the specific commands and everything inbetween them that you don't want get nuked - this is all intercepted before your post gets written as an HTML file on the host server, so you can pick and choose exactly which HTML commands you want to intercept. Since those commands are wiped from the file before posting, the browser is totally irrelevant.
DanS posted 06-19-99 05:15 PM ET
MtG: Quite so, they could do it if they wanted to. The thing is, Origin spends only a small amount of time maintaining this site, so they probably don't care.
However, I think you and I are talking at cross purposes. Origin maintains this board. Firaxis maintains its own board. From what I can tell, Origin never checks this board unless Jeffrey Morris gives them an emergency phone call about the troubleshooting forum being down. So it is entirely plausible that Stephen surfed through the non-SMAC section, saw the pic and thought to himself "we can't have this stuff on the Firaxis site, so I'll disable html and UBB's img tag." But there's really no way of knowing and it probably doesn't matter. If I were Firaxis and saw this type of thing it would be the end of off-topic.
Valtyr: thanks for the info. Netscape users do not even get the table containing the posts. Perhaps there is a more effective tag?
In any event, I'll stand by my decision to kill that thread (and only that thread). If anybody wants to resurrect it, they can, but nobody has. There must be a reason that nobody has, wouldn't you think?
DanS posted 06-19-99 05:17 PM ET
As a clarification, Stephen is a Firaxis intern who maintains the Firaxis bulletin board.
Mcerion posted 06-19-99 05:55 PM ET
DanS you admit you are a thread killer. What is the point of this going any further? Be a man, say you are sorry and stop doing it. Your gestapo tactics and excuses are self-serving and sad. Please do not infer that you are doing this for the good of the forum. I and I am sure the other members of this forum would agree that we don't need a babysitter to protect us from "objectional" images. Please refrain from more childish flames as you killed the threads. You confessed. I have since upgraded to IE5 and I am not going to crash my computer searching for the other thread that I found that you had killed. I won't be posting further on this subject. Enough said.
MichaeltheGreat posted 06-19-99 06:24 PM ET
Dan - they don't need to check the board at all, just add a few lines to a filter, like they do for words like **** - Nobody reads a post, and says "Golly gee shucks - there's a naughty word, Oh my" and then manually edits it out.
I don't think the pic should have been there, and it is entirely reasonable to block any pic posts, simply because of the increase in file size. But it is not your prerogative to pick and choose for us what is in any particular thread, unless its your damned board, or you are the moderator.
Nobody has "unkilled" the thread for the
simple reason that nobody cares enough one way or the other - I wasn't even aware of the pic until some other idiot posted about it. It's not worth anyone's time to "unkill" it.
"If I were Firaxis..." You're not - and you're not Origin either. A lot of us "have the power" to post whatever we want, and a lot of us know enough HTML to kill whatever we want. It doesn't give ANYONE the right to kill threads in an unmoderated forum.
If you want, put up your own board and be the forum Sturmfuhrer of the DanS forum GeheimeStaatsPolizei, but don't impose your moralistic crap here where you're nothing but one more poster.
So tell us daddy, so we don't run the risk of incurring your disapproval (oooh, gasp! the horror!) exactly what we have your permission to post and talk about, so you don't spank us and kill our threads.
Maybe you could be kind enough and provide a list of every word, phrase, action, thought and subject you don't approve of, so we can avoid being zapped by the great DanS Mark I Forumgod Threadkiller HTML code.
Whether you realize it or not, your judgment was just as bad as that of the poster of the pic in the first place.
DanS posted 06-20-99 01:55 AM ET
Mcerion: I still don't know what the other thread is. If you don't tell me, I can't even defend myself. I'm sure you can see why this is untenable, since it relies on inuendo.
"Be a man, say you are sorry and stop doing it. Your gestapo tactics and excuses are self-serving and sad."
I am a man and I stand by the decision. I'm not sorry about killing that thread, so it would be disingenuous to say I'm sorry. It was regrettable that all of the other good ideas in the thread were killed with the image. It was my hope that the conversation would be continued without the offending pic.
MtG: I was not under the impression that they manually edited it out. I know how UBB works and how they could do just as you say. The fact of the matter is, I would like to have html (including images) and the UBB img tag enabled on the Firaxis site. There are many threads where images are appropriate and useful, bandwidth considerations notwithstanding.
In any event, I couldn't let this groundless accusation of being a serial thread killer go unanswered. My task is complete unless Mcerion comes up with another thread he thinks I killed (which he will be unable to do, I assure you). If it such a bother for you to search it out, Mcerion, why did you post this topic in the first place?
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: DanS = Thread Killer
Mcerion	posted 06-12-99 05:46 AM ET DanS that stunt you are pulling doesn't work, but it is annoying.
DanS	posted 06-17-99 02:13 PM ET Which one?
Mcerion	posted 06-18-99 03:01 AM ET Which 2, you mean. There may be more.
DanS	posted 06-18-99 10:51 AM ET I have only killed one thread. Ever. That was a judiciously placed tag on the homophobics thread in Off-topic. Not that I objected to what was being said, rather it was because a picture of a woman giving a man a BJ was posted. Perhaps it smacked too much of vigilante justice, I don't know. I didn't like doing it, but judged it necessary for us to continue having the privilege of html. In the Firaxis off-topic forums, for instance, both html and UBB's img tag were turned off by Stephen Lee. This may have been due to that pic being posted. In any event, I am not a serial thread killer. If anybody with the requisite html knowledge would have wanted to "unkill" the thread, they could have done so easily. I judged that the guilty poster did not have this knowledge or would think twice before unkilling it. This judgment has been proven correct. If you believe that I have killed more threads than that one, please list the bill of particulars. In its stead, I will accept an apology...
DanS	posted 06-18-99 10:57 AM ET I also admit to being a little miffed by you posting this topic in an area that I don't often visit and in which this topic doesn't really belong. What can be your motive, other than slander, you "pig-dog"?
MichaeltheGreat	posted 06-18-99 12:27 PM ET For what it's worth, I doubt that Stephen Lee turned off UBB and HTML due to that pic - they were turned off previously, and the pic was not removed. It's also not that difficult to tweak HTML so that formatting, etc. is allowable, but pic posting or links or what have you is not. It doesn't make sense for someone to kill HTML due to an offending pic, and then leave the pic up, now does it?
DanS	posted 06-18-99 12:41 PM ET I'm not sure what you mean. Maybe IE renders it differently. For Netscape, the table with the posts is not displayed with the method I used (and therefore the pic is not displayed either). The whole table is killed. If I understand it correctly, IE may display the table until the tag I used is encountered but everything after that is ignored (a slower thread death). I don't know and would be interested to know. [i]"I doubt that Stephen Lee turned off UBB and HTML due to that pic - they were turned off previously"[/i] Even though Stephen may not have seen the pic, he has alluded to problems due to pics. I would like to keep html in the Non-SMAC forum, so I killed it. [i]"and the pic was not removed"[/i] Well Origin, the maintainers of this forum, may not have seen it and the Firaxians just kept mum even though they did see it (who knows?). At any rate, the picture was garbage and I would try to kill it again, if it reared its ugly head. There's a time and place for this stuff (Usenet).
DeVore	posted 06-18-99 12:47 PM ET So who gave you the right to play forum god ? People like you are worse than the idiot who posted the pic in the first place. /Dev
DanS	posted 06-18-99 01:04 PM ET Nobody did. And I am not a forum God. He had the power to post it. I had the power to kill it. He posted it. I killed it. EOF
Valtyr	posted 06-18-99 07:53 PM ET I use IE 5 and I can still see the picture. After DanS' post the thread stops.
MichaeltheGreat	posted 06-19-99 12:25 AM ET When you post words like **** - prior to the file being saved on the server it runs through a little search routine to replace "undesired" words. The sysadmin can do the same thing with HTML commands, so that the specific commands and everything inbetween them that you don't want get nuked - this is all intercepted before your post gets written as an HTML file on the host server, so you can pick and choose exactly which HTML commands you want to intercept. Since those commands are wiped from the file before posting, the browser is totally irrelevant.
DanS	posted 06-19-99 05:15 PM ET MtG: Quite so, they could do it if they wanted to. The thing is, Origin spends only a small amount of time maintaining this site, so they probably don't care. However, I think you and I are talking at cross purposes. Origin maintains this board. Firaxis maintains its own board. From what I can tell, Origin never checks this board unless Jeffrey Morris gives them an emergency phone call about the troubleshooting forum being down. So it is entirely plausible that Stephen surfed through the non-SMAC section, saw the pic and thought to himself "we can't have this stuff on the Firaxis site, so I'll disable html and UBB's img tag." But there's really no way of knowing and it probably doesn't matter. If I were Firaxis and saw this type of thing it would be the end of off-topic. Valtyr: thanks for the info. Netscape users do not even get the table containing the posts. Perhaps there is a more effective tag? In any event, I'll stand by my decision to kill that thread (and only that thread). If anybody wants to resurrect it, they can, but nobody has. There must be a reason that nobody has, wouldn't you think?
DanS	posted 06-19-99 05:17 PM ET As a clarification, Stephen is a Firaxis intern who maintains the Firaxis bulletin board.
Mcerion	posted 06-19-99 05:55 PM ET DanS you admit you are a thread killer. What is the point of this going any further? Be a man, say you are sorry and stop doing it. Your gestapo tactics and excuses are self-serving and sad. Please do not infer that you are doing this for the good of the forum. I and I am sure the other members of this forum would agree that we don't need a babysitter to protect us from "objectional" images. Please refrain from more childish flames as you killed the threads. You confessed. I have since upgraded to IE5 and I am not going to crash my computer searching for the other thread that I found that you had killed. I won't be posting further on this subject. Enough said.
MichaeltheGreat	posted 06-19-99 06:24 PM ET Dan - they don't need to check the board at all, just add a few lines to a filter, like they do for words like **** - Nobody reads a post, and says "Golly gee shucks - there's a naughty word, Oh my" and then manually edits it out. I don't think the pic should have been there, and it is entirely reasonable to block any pic posts, simply because of the increase in file size. But it is not your prerogative to pick and choose for us what is in any particular thread, unless its your damned board, or you are the moderator. Nobody has "unkilled" the thread for the simple reason that nobody cares enough one way or the other - I wasn't even aware of the pic until some other idiot posted about it. It's not worth anyone's time to "unkill" it. "If I were Firaxis..." You're not - and you're not Origin either. A lot of us "have the power" to post whatever we want, and a lot of us know enough HTML to kill whatever we want. It doesn't give ANYONE the right to kill threads in an unmoderated forum. If you want, put up your own board and be the forum Sturmfuhrer of the DanS forum GeheimeStaatsPolizei, but don't impose your moralistic crap here where you're nothing but one more poster. So tell us daddy, so we don't run the risk of incurring your disapproval (oooh, gasp! the horror!) exactly what we have your permission to post and talk about, so you don't spank us and kill our threads. Maybe you could be kind enough and provide a list of every word, phrase, action, thought and subject you don't approve of, so we can avoid being zapped by the great DanS Mark I Forumgod Threadkiller HTML code. Whether you realize it or not, your judgment was just as bad as that of the poster of the pic in the first place.
DanS	posted 06-20-99 01:55 AM ET Mcerion: I still don't know what the other thread is. If you don't tell me, I can't even defend myself. I'm sure you can see why this is untenable, since it relies on inuendo. "Be a man, say you are sorry and stop doing it. Your gestapo tactics and excuses are self-serving and sad." I am a man and I stand by the decision. I'm not sorry about killing that thread, so it would be disingenuous to say I'm sorry. It was regrettable that all of the other good ideas in the thread were killed with the image. It was my hope that the conversation would be continued without the offending pic. MtG: I was not under the impression that they manually edited it out. I know how UBB works and how they could do just as you say. The fact of the matter is, I would like to have html (including images) and the UBB img tag enabled on the Firaxis site. There are many threads where images are appropriate and useful, bandwidth considerations notwithstanding. In any event, I couldn't let this groundless accusation of being a serial thread killer go unanswered. My task is complete unless Mcerion comes up with another thread he thinks I killed (which he will be unable to do, I assure you). If it such a bother for you to search it out, Mcerion, why did you post this topic in the first place?