quote Originally posted by Unsafe At Any Speed: Sounds kinda pre-15th Amendment to me. A person's right to rate should not be determined by the color of their bar.

Hahah.. Funny.

On the other hand, are convicted felons allowed to vote? A bit of an extreme comparison, but you get my point.

[This message has been edited by Stinkin_V8 (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by MaxCubes: Look at the signatures of these "red bar" members if they even have one. Your not going to see a nice Fiero.

http://www.geocities.com/morley_m/northstar.htm

quote Originally posted by Fiero5: Here's a question, if the trolls come into a thread and litterally spew their crap all thru it ...

Fiero5, I think you missed my point when I said that one person alone cannot cause a flame war. One person alone cannot have an argument. There has to be somebody to argue with. Your bickering on the first few pages of this thread is a good example.

I am now going to take my own advice and bow out of this thread. You may have the last word, if you wish.

Despite what some of you believe, the majority of this forum is still flame free, and that's where I'm going.

Bye!

Doug

[Edited for formatting. Gotta learn to use that Preview button.]

[This message has been edited by Doug Chase (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by MaxCubes: An observation... ...have you noticed that most of the "red bar" members don't have a Fiero worth much to speak of.... and so they feel they must throw insults at others to make themselves feel better. Look at the signatures of these "red bar" members if they even have one. Your not going to see a nice Fiero.

your totally wrong. so wrong your at the other end of the spectrum. Punisher has a 2.8 nos fed 88 formula. Jon has a northstar in his. and mine you can check yourself.

------------------
1984 Indy Fiero 3.4L 4spd
www.cardomain.com/id/donk_316

Member of the Redbar Brigade

quote Originally posted by Doug Chase: Fiero5, I think you missed my point when I said that one person alone cannot cause a flame war. One person alone cannot have an argument. There has to be somebody to argue with. Your bickering on the first few pages of this thread is a good example. I am now going to take my own advice and bow out of this thread. You may have the last word, if you wish. Despite what some of you believe, the majority of this forum is still flame free, and that's where I'm going. Bye! Doug [Edited for formatting. Gotta learn to use that Preview button.]

Agreed completely, that's been my point for a while now.

quote Originally posted by LZeitgeist: but when Cliff signs back on, he can attest that every word I'm posting is true and unadulterated.

Yes (although I'm unsure what the point is you are trying to make).

But what you are asking I'm not willing to do - just yet. Altering the rating system now for the sole purpose of getting a few members banned, is simply not going to happen. That's like altering the voting system during the election so now, suddenly your favorite president wins. The rating system has been the way it is now for quite some time. And I didn't see you complain about it in the past. I have started several threads in the past year asking for feedback on the rating system and if it needs change, and the general concensus was that it was fine the way it is.

I will change the rating system soon. But when I do, it has to be for the proper reasons.

Because please tell me, what say I lowered the ratio, and it turns out the bad members you are talking about still aren't banned because their rating still doesn't warrant it? Are you going to be on my case again and tell me to lower it even more? And suppose I do, and they are still not banned? Are you going to post more "Cliff doesn't give a crap" messages until I lower it until they finally are banned?

You see, maybe your intentions are good (you want the forum to be clean), but the cause is wrong. You want it changed because you want specific members gone. If you want those members gone, use the tool as it is now. And as it is now, a great number of members have voted to let them stay. And as much as you hate that (and believe me, I do too), I will not change the rating system just so these members get banned.

You see, I am just as pissed as you are. But instead of blaming the rating system (or in your case, me), I'm pissed at the people that voted them to stay. And I'm telling you, it wasn't just the other "bad guys" that voted them to stay.

Of course I have "the power" to get rid of them. I can totally disregard the rating system and ban them. I can change it just enough so they get banned. Heck, I can even "rig" the system. You think anyone would notice if I added a few negatives to their ratings? Or if I simply changed their ratio only? Nobody would notice. But I'm sorry, I will never, ever do such a thing.

So if you want these guys banned, please tell me what you think is a fair ratio (of pos/neg) before people get banned. And if everybody agrees, I'll implement that. But do not, I repeat, do not come crying to me again when it turns out they still aren't banned, or when the new ratio suddenly bans members you didn't want to see banned.

quote Originally posted by Fierochic88: Agreed completely, that's been my point for a while now.

Ditto.....

quote Originally posted by MaxCubes: An observation... ...have you noticed that most of the "red bar" members don't have a Fiero worth much to speak of.... and so they feel they must throw insults at others to make themselves feel better. Look at the signatures of these "red bar" members if they even have one. Your not going to see a nice Fiero.

I also find this very interesting, the other day I was thinking the same thing, and I couldn't put a pictured Fiero to any one of the "red bar" members. Secondly, I did a pretty extensive search on each one of them in Tech/General Topics, to find extremely little in the way of positive contribution (above what I would consider normal, rating a plus). Why did I go through all the trouble? I wanted to be sure that I wasn't the one "off base".

quote Originally posted by donk316: your totally wrong. so wrong your at the other end of the spectrum. Punisher has a 2.8 nos fed 88 formula. Jon has a northstar in his. and mine you can check yourself.

Donk, this is beyond being about your car. It's nice and I can appreciate the work you've put into it. Your negative and abusive attitude here has never been warranted and 290 members have already told you what they think of your contributions to this forum. By my math - and someone please correct me if I'm wrong - at minus five on the gauge, you are now up to 218 negative ratings and 72 positives.

I truly believe that even one less abusive forum member will make a difference. Please, take 218 hints and go away.

The 15th Amendment had something to do with rating bars? Wow! I didn't realize that! haha

While that may not be the total answer, I see what Patrick is saying. How about that those people who were banned and allowed back? What if they lost their right to vote? Convicted felons don't have a right to vote, and that is basically what a banned per son is. They were convicted of their crimes by their PFF peers. But I figure that would be a programming nightmare for Cliff.

Patrick, I do see why you are so stressed out over this. I am too obviously. I have asked many times why certain people are still here.. The sames ones you asked about... What is becoming accepted behaviour around here is ridiculous. And you are right. Anyone who gives these people a positive because they think it is funny is just as bad as them... Do I think we can change it? Doubtful. My personal opinion is that, as stated, the percentage is now too high to ban someone. I know you didn't intend to attack Cliff, but I think he is doing all that the current system allows him to do without breaking his own rules. I think that the system just needs to be modifed. Working WITH Cliff is the way to do this...

I do, however, think there are certain things that she be reason enough for an automatic ban. Any comments stating that a child was seen in p0rnography would be the number one reason. (I'm kinda wondering if this public admission of looking at child **** could be considered criminal.) Any statement insinuating that a child have any involvement with any adults genitalia would be another...

As I said, too much unacceptable behaviour is becoming acceptable around here lately. People use all sorts of reasons to hide behind to say they have the right to do it.. We just have to show them that they are wrong...

[This message has been edited by Songman (edited 10-26-2004).]

I agree that fairness should be a prime concern on a public forum...and it appears that little boys with nothing better to do than hide behind keyboards will always exist. But Cliff, there are things that should be grounds for IMMEDIATE banning. making sladerous comments and insinuating a child/**** connection are not acceptable even ONCE...and yes, apparently, admitting on a public forum that you have frequented a child pornography site,(even if you're just an idiot and are lying because you don't get attention anywhere else) is of GREAT concern to certain watchdog groups....especially if the person admitting it leaves his email address on his profile and it gets forwarded.

[This message has been edited by Rie (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by Songman: As I said, too much unacceptable behaviour is becoming acceptable around here lately. People use all sorts of reasons to hide behind to say they have the right to do it.. We just have to show them that they are wrong...

I wish you better luck than my adventure today has proven.

quote Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: The rating system has been the way it is now for quite some time. And I didn't see you complain about it in the past. I have started several threads in the past year asking for feedback on the rating system and if it needs change, and the general concensus was that it was fine the way it is. I will change the rating system soon. But when I do, it has to be for the proper reasons. You see, maybe your intentions are good (you want the forum to be clean), but the cause is wrong. You want it changed because you want specific members gone. If you want those members gone, use the tool as it is now. And as it is now, a great number of members have voted to let them stay. And as much as you hate that (and believe me, I do too), I will not change the rating system just so these members get banned. You see, I am just as pissed as you are. But instead of blaming the rating system (or in your case, me), I'm pissed at the people that voted them to stay. And I'm telling you, it wasn't just the other "bad guys" that voted them to stay.

I edited some of it cause it didn't pertain.

There is nothing wrong with the ratings system.Why you would want to change what works i don't know.Just because a few guys being jerks and a few guys complaining loudly is not a emergency situation.When somebody really needs to be gone it happens.Unfortunatly they just come back under a different name but thats another story.If people wanted punisher or I'm Back or bill and donk or any number of other gone they would be.We got the button to do it.If we don't then we don't.You shouldn't even care.
Besides a lot of stress may be relieved after the elections here and people will calm down a bit.

Disagreeing is what makes it interesting anyway.
I disagree with at least half of the people here in california.Theres probably 15 active people from california on the forum and i know most of them personally.
We argue about different things.We believe different things.But we all seem to have enough respect for each other to party,getdrunk,trade parts,loan equipment And some of us even work together on occasion.We don't try and kill eachother.We luckily don't have anyone here that gets really pissy and it only takes one to bring out another.
I will use Stimpy as an example because i think he's tough enough not to get upset.I Don't agree with Stimpy most of the time about politics and not one time have we ever called eachother a foul name.So it would seem were not the problem.Not so.
I don't agree with I'm Back on most issues Either but i cant stand him.The difference is respect.I don't see him having any and the only way i can respect him is to avoid him.He is on the way out the door and i don't have to respond or address him if i don't want to.If And when I do get in a tiff with him it is just as much my fault.Avoid the jerks and you end the problem.
On the forum you have to expect it.It's huge.The bigger the party the more chance of it getting shut down by the cops.
If you hate em then rate em.If others don't rate em the same then just live with it.This has got to be the best forum i ever seen.

Cliff your the moderator not the babysitter.Let them cry a bit they will get tired and go to sleep like every baby does.

[This message has been edited by pokeyfiero (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by Stinkin_V8: Your negative and abusive attitude here has never been warranted and 290 members have already told you what they think of your contributions to this forum. By my math - and someone please correct me if I'm wrong - at minus five on the gauge, you are now up to 218 negative ratings and 72 positives. I truly believe that even one less abusive forum member will make a difference. Please, take 218 hints and go away.

Why are you so bitter?

And Cali...look harder. ill give you links if you want them.

quote Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: So if you want these guys banned, please tell me what you think is a fair ratio (of pos/neg) before people get banned. And if everybody agrees, I'll implement that. But do not, I repeat, do not come crying to me again when it turns out they still aren't banned, or when the new ratio suddenly bans members you didn't want to see banned.

67% bad rating should get you banned.

BUT, also I don't want to see anyone banned, I just want them to follow the rules. It would be so much easier to not have an all or nothing system. That is the trouble with how it is set up, "go free or death penalty." There are many steps in between, that is why you see some good members rating the trolls with a positive. They feel that the person has not yet earned the death penalty. The trolls walk the line to stay just to the side of it. If the rules were enforced with a less all enclusive system things would be a lot calmer. It seems hypocritical to have rules that are not enforced.

pokey,

a civil disagreement is one thing. They are going to happen. People trashing a child or even worse, talking about child pr0n or other things that have been suggested is just plain disgraceful. (Donk, you still have not answered my question from page 3)

A heated debate can be constructive, and there is no way to stop all flame wars. We all just need to be able to look in the mirror.

I said it before and I'll repeat it here again: We're not here (on earth) for a long time, we're here (or at leaset we should be here) for a good time, let's be cool to each other.

quote Originally posted by LZeitgeist: I wish you better luck than my adventure today has proven.

Your not exactly a green bar yourself.

I think a couple of us are willing to change our style, so to speak. That's not going to do it for some of you. is it?

[This message has been edited by Lex (edited 10-26-2004).]

I got an idea... Cliff can use someone who doesn't own a Fiero to help moderate the forums <raising hand highly>... That way, no one can complain about my Fiero looks cooler than yours!

--- goobz!

------------------
"Real American Heroes - Today we solute you, Mr. Ford Truck Towing A Fiero Guy. When most people don't even know what a Fiero is, let alone just where the motor is, you seem to somehow fit right in. You see the looks people give to that car with the PIAA light conversion, the 2" drop springs, big scoops on the hood, and the 19" tires that are bigger than the car itself, and get a kick out of their reactions. You get all warm and gooshy inside by knowing you help out children in need by putting smiles on their faces, whenever you drive by with that car on the trailer all lit up with neon. A car that isn't made anymore, is kept alive by being the prize posession of most of their owners who spend 5 times more than what they paid for them to gain a few more horsepower, and loose a couple seconds off their 1/4 mile, and spend many of nights sleeping "in the dog house" because of it. You help them save their paychecks on tow bills by being the "Fieros West & WCF Support Vehicle". So crack open a drink, Fiero Tower Guy, and know that the Fiero community appreciates your participation & support. If it wasn't for you, we wouldn't be able to show Corvettes and Porches just how Mean the "M" in 2M6 can get!

quote Originally posted by Songman: I do, however, think there are certain things that she be reason enough for an automatic ban. Any comments stating that a child was seen in p0rnography would be the number one reason. (I'm kinda wondering if this public admission of looking at child **** could be considered criminal.) Any statement insinuating that a child have any involvement with any adults genitalia would be another...

C'mon.. Now you are getting a little ridiculous (yes, you are subtly hinting that you should get him in trouble with the authorities), and no, thats not criminal.. You're comparing voting on PFF to voting in America.. Perhaps you should take a vacation for a couple days.. Chill out.. Have a margarita..

No Johnny...whats ridiculous is a grown man trying to make himself feel big by being obscene and cruel to a little boy....Just give me one valid defense to what he said....one....and please get off the "freedom of speech" bullsh*t- when you start to attack children you have crossed that line.

quote Originally posted by JohnnyK: C'mon.. Now you are getting a little ridiculous (yes, you are subtly hinting that you should get him in trouble with the authorities), and no, thats not criminal.. You're comparing voting on PFF to voting in America.. Perhaps you should take a vacation for a couple days.. Chill out.. Have a margarita..

Yes, I am hinting at it so that he will think before he speaks... And yes, child pornography is criminal. According to his words he was looking at it and saw fiero5's child. If he doesn't watch what he says for the sake of others, maybe he will to save his own neck.

And read it again above.. I am not the one who mentioned the 15th Amendment and acted like it applied here. I just responded to someone else saying that... Apparently you have a problem with me since you called me on saying it when clearly I was just responding to someone else's words.

And thank you for the suggestion to take a vacation. I plan to do exactly that after the Coast Run is over. After a few months I'll probably pop my head back in to see what is going on. If the forum is still being abused by the so-called Red Bar Brigade, I'll move along. If not, I'll start participating again... And yes, in my opinion it has gotten that bad...

And Johnny, apparently you have something personally against me. While I don't agree with you on most things, I don't consider you to be one of the problem children on this forum. While I do find some things you say offensive, I don't find you to be abusive... The abusive ones are the one that don't deserve to be here.

no.. i think that what he said was perfectly fine, songman not the other guy, and that should be an instant ban.

"Be Excellent To Each Other" - Bill S. Preston Esquire Ted Theadore Logan

[This message has been edited by TaurusThug (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by Songman: Yes, I am hinting at it so that he will think before he speaks... And yes, child pornography is criminal. According to his words he was looking at it and saw fiero5's child. If he doesn't watch what he says for the sake of others, maybe he will to save his own neck. And read it again above.. I am not the one who mentioned the 15th Amendment and acted like it applied here. I just responded to someone else saying that... Apparently you have a problem with me since you called me on saying it when clearly I was just responding to someone else's words. And thank you for the suggestion to take a vacation. I plan to do exactly that after the Coast Run is over. After a few months I'll probably pop my head back in to see what is going on. If the forum is still being abused by the so-called Red Bar Brigade, I'll move along. If not, I'll start participating again... And yes, in my opinion it has gotten that bad... And Johnny, apparently you have something personally against me. While I don't agree with you on most things, I don't consider you to be one of the problem children on this forum. While I do find some things you say offensive, I don't find you to be abusive... The abusive ones are the one that don't deserve to be here.

I don't have a problem with you at all. I think you're probably a great guy. I mean, we've disagreed recently, and while I don't find disagreeing the most pleasant way to spend my day, it's not a problem really. That being said, I still think the judge would read it in context, see it was a joke, and throw it out, and be quite angry about wasting time though.. He might say it was inappropriate, but thats about all I would think.

If I sign my dangly bits and post a picture, will it end all this nonsense?

jesus H chrap....what a bunch of friggin drama queens...can this thread end now?

There have always been trolls in this forum (as there is in every forum), and there’s always been the retards out there who enjoy their brand of twisted humour. These morons don’t care in the least who’s being hurt by hateful comments, they just want to be entertained in their own sick way. The sharper the attacks by the trolls, the more it’s eaten up by these pigs. I don’t know who’s worse, the trolls or their supporters.

With the present ratings system, I’m wondering how difficult (or easy) it is for individuals to be registered under numerous identities and to be voting numerous times. Could this be the reason why some of these guys keep hanging in there? Is it possible that the trolls (and their lap-dog followers) are artificially generating positive votes in this manner? Cliff, any comment?

quote Originally posted by Patrick: . With the present ratings system, I’m wondering how difficult (or easy) it is for individuals to be registered under numerous identities and to be voting numerous times. Could this be the reason why some of these guys keep hanging in there? Is it possible that the trolls (and their lap-dog followers) are artificially generating positive votes in this manner? Cliff, any comment?

^ That trick is being used by whites and greens. I have had a couple pm's telling me that it would be the way I'd get banned.

Hello Pot? This is kettle.

quote Originally posted by JohnnyK: If I sign my dangly bits and post a picture, will it end all this nonsense?

Please don't... haha

If someone is keeping multiple screennames, they are really having to work it. A screenname must have at least 30 posts before they can rate someone. Yes, there may be some who will go to that trouble but I don't think it is many...

[This message has been edited by Songman (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by donk316: jesus H chrap....what a bunch of friggin drama queens...can this thread end now?

try to help the cause and it WILL end

------------------
'86 Fiero GT

My Fiero XoticRydzMid-Rear Madness

Member of the "Im Tired Of All The Flame Wars" committee ITOATFW

Be Excellent To Each Other" - Bill S. Preston Esquire Ted Theadore Logan

quote Originally posted by Lex: That trick is being used by whites and greens. I have had a couple pm's telling me that it would be the way I'd get banned.

If what you're saying is true, then I'm afraid the ratings system here has a fatal flaw.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: If what you're saying is true, then I'm afraid the ratings system here has a fatal flaw.

yes its true... if you have x number of email addys then you can have x number of accounts on here and even though thats against the forum rules it has and is done. it happens and it is sad that it does... i really wish that it COULDNT happen. i doubt that there is ANYTHING that we can do. ive made my votes and changed some of mine that i hadnt gotten around to changing. hopefully my efforts will help rid the board of the trolls.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: If what you're saying is true, then I'm afraid the ratings system here has a fatal flaw.

Then there is the issue of multiple members under the same roof. My brother is also on PFF(he's not a problem child like me, doesn't have a bar, and hangs out in tech most of the time ). Many ppl's spouses, family, etc. sign up. Should those people NOT be allowed to vote?

quote Originally posted by Lex: Then there is the issue of multiple members under the same roof. My brother is also on PFF. Many ppl's spouses, family, etc. sign up. Should those people NOT be allowed to vote?

Every legitimate member of this forum should be allowed to vote. That's not being argued.

Having individuals registering under many different aliases is a completely different situation.

im not a 'tweener... im not thought to be a pain OR a saint... i have roughly equal pos and negs. if i was in the negs i would probably be talking a little different. but hopefully i wont have to because i havent had anyone send me any PM's telling me that they thought badly of me. if someone does have a problem w/ me and does send me a pm or email then i wil do my best to try and resolve the issue with them. im tired so i probably dont make any sense so im off for the night...

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Having individuals registering under many different aliases is a completely different situation.

That may be hard to control.

I see what Lex is saying about the logistical nightmare of trying to enforce such a policy... Lots of us have spouses or other family members with Fieros. My wife has a Fiero and her own screenname. She logs on from her own computer in our house but since it is on the same network as mine, her IP would show the same to Cliff if he checked. Sadly, this seems to be left to the honor system. Anyone who is not following this rule is also breaking forum rules. As much as I would like to see a couple of troublemakers gone from this forum, and it is only a couple, I don't think underhanded tricks is the way to do it

quote Originally posted by Lex: That may be hard to control.

Well then, as I stated earlier, that would make the ratings system here fatally flawed.

I hope at some point that Cliff will see and respond to these concerns.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Well then, as I stated earlier, that would make the ratings system here fatally flawed. I hope at some point that Cliff will see and respond to these concerns.

Each ip gets one vote?
\

[This message has been edited by Lex (edited 10-26-2004).]

quote Originally posted by donk316: And Cali...look harder. ill give you links if you want them.

No Thank You........I've read more than enough to satisfy my curiousity.

quote Originally posted by donk316: Why are you so bitter?

Please don't confuse my contempt of your actions with bitterness. I have seen a few posts where you have been helpful, you seem to know your stuff when it comes to 60 degree engines. There comes a point when your poor attitude towards others outweighs your usefulness on this forum and the point has passed.

The original "autograph" statement was appalling.Your defence of the autograph statement was even more appaling, since you've stated in the past that you have 2 kids. I stayed out of the magazine thread because it did not concern me. Early in this thread, a few members made a stand and I saw that by not saying anything, I would be part of the problem. I am making a stand now and like I said - you were the only one who had a neg from me in this thread.

I had refrained in the past from rating the member who's "autograph" statement you defend because he'd never said anything offensive to/about me. That was me being part of the problem. I just looked at why I had rated him recently, and it was for bashing Canada. The same Canada that includes Red Deer, Alberta and Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. The thread has since disappeared but this is what I had in my rating: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum1/HTML/046230.html.

So, the very person you stand in defense of - who hasn't set foot in here to back you up, BTW - thinks our home and native land is funny. I hope you feel good about your standpoint.

quote jesus H chrap....what a bunch of friggin drama queens...can this thread end now?

Sure. 221 people have already told you that your attitude is unacceptable on this forum. Maybe my math is wrong, nobody's corrected me yet. I've asked you three times to take the hint and leave. Regardless, I think you should leave and allow the rest of us to continue on with positive, constructive (but not without disagreement) discussions about Fieros. I believe it's possible.

Once again: Donk316, two hundred and twenty one people have already said they don't want you on this forum. Can you please help us out?

quote Originally posted by Stinkin_V8: Once again: Donk316, two hundred and twenty one people have already said they don't want you on this forum. Can you please help us out?

Songman said donk has changed. A couple of others have too. Out side of the fact that he has more negs than +'s, can you give a valid reason why he should be banned or leave? Can you cite a specific and recent example?

[This message has been edited by Lex (edited 10-26-2004).]