Proposed experiment to test ILE as a registered-users only board (an RFC i spose)

presumably this will be based on show of hands/majority rule? i don't expect people's views to change much after 8 weeks so the arguments for and against will surely be the same as they are now.

As they say in Finland, try everything once except incest and folkdancing... ;-)

And yes, THIS WOULD NOT AFFECT ANY OTHER BOARDS.

(x-post to Stevem)

The best thing about this thread is that evidently I've had the power to make ILE registered users only ALL THIS TIME and never noticed.

(kidding, I think this is a fine idea, in that I dont mind either way and it might help head spambots off at the pass)

(isn't andrewNF back? he has posted recently)

(when Philip Greenspun wz still the prior Elder Deity we traced the outages to the fact that the server wz kept in his garage where his dog pissed on it a lot)

user IP lookup will identify them provided their IP is distinctive enough i.e. doesn't bring up a load of different posters sharing the same range.

the trolls arent bad, and isolating ourselves as a cute little elite will atrophy the boards--i hate this idea, loathe it.

the best of ilx is free and open discourse, debating and fighting in the open.

snobbish wankery, this plan...against the whole philospohy of the place. (ie the geezers manifesto)

im gone if this happens.

What do you have against the good people of Rentucky, Mark?

1. It's temporary, just to see what happens
2. WE DON'T KNOW what effect it will have, which is why we're doing it.
3. Registration takes what 30seconds?

i think in yesterday's case, with Marcello, they certainly were bad. as they were with the Liz thread. there are countless examples of ugliness caused by anon trolls (ugliness caused by logged in regulars is a separate issue). people are sick of it and that's fair enough.

tom, the simple act of requring regresitry places one step impeding access to discourse, whats next.

i doubt v. much this will stay temporary.

You are being ridiculously disengenuous here, Anthony. I'm not impressed.

tom, the simple act of requring regresitry places one step impeding access to discourse, whats next.

OH, ARMAGEDDON, EVIDENTLY.

and the liz stuff was delting which suggests that the system is regulating itself rather well

it upset an awful lot of people and nothing was gained from it. it caused about four different people to post threads on the Mod Request board even tho it was spotted straight away. why would you want people to tolerate this sort of thing because of some bogus notion of free speech being paramount on something as trivial (ultimately) as a public msg board?

If people vote against it it will be temporary, if people vote in favour it won't. Simple as that.

Nathalie - you can use your current login, nobody has to re-register.

i didnt mean at all that mods screen, if i implied that im sorry.

the weird thing is that the cool kids have already decided this months ago, and they have found a way to implement it under a seemingly democratic structure.

if you want to, go ahead.
i wont be here.

i think this somewhat demolishes yr argument anthony

can someone explain exactly what happened to liz.

(xpost... ummm)

i will miss the stupid googlers though :( oh well i'm not a mod innit.

Are you claiming that, even if the promised vote would be against an registered-only board, the admins would still go on with it? I think a lot more people than you (me included) would leave the board then. I think the only scenario where the "cool kids" would change the board without asking for anyone's opinion would be if the amount of spam got intolerable, and that I think is fair enough.

xpost the best googlers are on ILM anyway.

hey if they're that stupid they probably will register still, just to make their hilarious comments.

this is shockingly unfair. ever since the p0wk3r spam started appearing everywhere a couple of weeks back, there has been sporadic discussion of reg-only posting. i was up early enough yesterday morning to see what was posted in reply to marcello, and it was fucking repulsive: whoever did that needs punched repeatedly. problem is: nobody knows who it was. this discussion has arisen, very quickly, from that. the very fact that i - who am certainly not a "cool kid" - am participating and being listened to suggests that ILE is as democratic as ever.

if ILX is a community, which it is, it needs to have some very basic rules. it can't exist as a completely anarchic state. and even if, after however many weeks, ILE did go reg-posters-only, all the other boards would still be free-for-alls.

but good god, we're only at the proposal stage right now :)

because
i. you haven't read the proposal properly yet
ii. because you think that the SYMBOLIC is the same as the ACTUAL (ie actual democarcy = if only one person disagrees then it gets through) (symbolic democracy = if anthony disagrees DEPSITE NOT BOTHERING TO DISCOVER THE BACK STORY then the motion falls)
iii. because unlike the mods - who have had to deal w.people skreeking at them from all angles these last few weeks - you are unaware of the specific events which led to this suggestion
iv. since when did the MODS become the "kool kids"? they give their time FOR FREE to solve problems for OTHER PEOPLE = they get to propose and enact solutions when those OTHER PEOPLE complain

Also: no more messages from folks who think they're logged out but aren't. Oh well.

Word.

one of the things i love about ilx, is its refusal of any one culture--its jump right in ethos, and i think that by logging on then something is lost, the ethos that marked ilx is lost, and that makes me v. angry, b/c frankly i have staked too much here anyways.

if someone can give me full context on the liz situation, of course, i would appreciate that.

i truly belive in a foccualdian sense, limiting access (no matter for how short a time) is limiting discourse, and that really worries me, and you cannot often undo the limitations that one has put in place...i think perhaps of ilx as an anarachist collective, who is dealing badly with conflict, but then most anarachist collectives do.

i would sooner not have mods, frankly, so im far off on this issue, and maybe should excuse myself in general.

ILE2 is the kind of board anthony - and possibly other die-hards also - want to continue: he is saying he threatens to leave forever if such a board isn't allowed to continue to exist; since it is EASY TO IMPLEMENT, sys-admin ALANG has proposed that such a board be allowed to continue to exist for the POSTING PLEASURE OF THE DIE-HARDS who would leave else

You've obviously been away for a while - I'd do a title search for the Liz threads if I were you. This isn't really the thread to discuss it.

segeration is nearly as bad no?

to say that no potential new posters would be put off by register would be silly, but then we'll never know anyway.

i am guessing anthony's fear is that the kind of free-spirits who have an "I DON'T REGISTER FOR ANYTHING" attitude will be the ones that ILX won't have the pleasure of ever meeting from now on. I can understand that feeling really. and i guess that is the point of ile2 isn't it?

i think ile2 should only talk about loving everything in the 70s and 80s, like TOTP2.

the picture thread dedicated to her was invaded by a particularly toxic troll posting horrible tasteless pictures (which i didn't see); the mods had to spend a day or two on constant watch deleting them until the problem was solved (i think) by making the thread registered-only

the marcello issue is this (i think it's laid out on the thread alan linked to but since you have an allergy to reading this morning):

marcello posted a thread about laura yesterday on the anniversary of her death (as he has done every year). and some twat posted on it jeering at him --- he got extremely (and justifiably) upset, but no mods were around for several hours to delete, which he took to mean no mods cared to act

the sinker not emailing anthony issue is this: in addition to a succession of family issue which you are well aware of i have had repeated computer meltdowns these last few months and lost most of my recent emails from eg you, so apologies for any responses that didn't get made --- i kinda took a two-month break from "being there for everyone" bcz it wz making me ratty all the time

this IS mostly about your paranoia

unless you post from an insecure pc like an internet cafe

he got extremely (and justifiably) upset, but no mods were around for several hours to delete, which he took to mean no mods cared to act

In future it might serve as a warning, to wait until mods are at work, before posting sensitive material! But the 'reg only' trial should counter this anyway.

xpost

in fairness, there is the wh3rd/p3r/links-between-them issue, which can cause what appear to be "random logouts". this might be worth explaining on the FAQ anyway: it confused the buggery out of me at first.

I'm with Anthony on the general emotional level of hating any form of tribalism or restriction. Milton's Areopagitica is urgent and key here. There's no virtue without temptation, and there's no system that's improved by the exclusion of criticism.

Suzy is here with me (we're in Edinburgh) and shouts: "Say I say it's wack as well!"

In future it might serve as a warning, to wait until mods are at work, before posting sensitive material! But the 'reg only' trial should counter this anyway.

not for this particular problem surely. (someone could just register "joebloggs" and then post something and the mods still had to be there in the first place to delete and ban that username!)

and i wish it was in my power to get rid of that :-(

so, ok, good point, for no good reason it's actually TWICE :-)

Okay, so I've answered my own question - you *do* need a valid email address when you register, cos it then emails you yer password. So if you're unable to use your email account for some reason, you won't be able to complete the registration process and thus you won't be able to post. I see that as a pretty robust barrier to participating, not sure how significant that particular scenario is though.

Blimey, I misread that as wait until Mods are at work (i.e. away) before posting insensitive material. heh.

Things Mods Ought To Do Before The ILE Reg-Only Trial

it remains to be seen whether this will actually happen though i.e. someone actually registering in order to indulge in unpleasant trolling. i'm fascinated to see if it will occur but i actually doubt it will (of course i may be proved wrong, we'll see).

I do understand Anthony's reservations about impeding discourse, I think. I don't agree that free speech is being threatened but I'm interested to see how the atmosphere on the board is different. I wonder if it will be a lot less free flowing. And random googlers do add a lot, except of course when they're proper trolls. I also don't agree about the cool kids etc. I can't imagine another board where a proposal is debated and tested like this for months, rather than just doing it. Yay us! But most of all, I think, it's the spambots and the vicious trolls that need to be dealt with and I haven't seen or come up with any better proposal.

there's no system that's improved by the exclusion of criticism

I don't get how making the board log-in only is going to exclude criticism. It doesn't seem to be about that at all, to me – I thought it was about trolling and spamming. My gut instinct was to resist agreeing with the proposal because any kind of restriction seems a shame, but I still think the problems need addressing. I mean it's not the fucking PATRIOT act is it?

(Apart from the opening it up again at the end bit.)

i'm sorry, i thought we were talking about a general message board which is being routinely abused by spammers and vile trolls; not an anarchist-utopian ideal for living.

official announcement. seems a bit rude not to.

Your repeated implication (and statement) that the Powers That Be have already decided to go reg-only whatever happens is really insulting to a lot of people who consider themselves your friends. Fucking stop it.

Incidentally, I'm not sure why it's more up to her than other mods! But no great shakes.

There's gonna be law in Deadwood soon.

I'm not particularly in favour of having ILE registered-users only, but I don't mind the test happening to see what it's actually like.

Sean C was chosen by either me or Mark, I forget.
Teeny, Matt and Steve were chosen by Martin S when he stopped being one.

When a mod steps down they usually propose their replacement(s) to Andrew who either vetos or doesn't.

(That's how it works on ILE. On ILM it's a lot easier and there are a lot more of them. The small boards only have one or two. The Noize Bored is its own thing.)

xpost what Steve said.

I do think that registering limits free discourse, but it promotes honest discourse. Yes ideally we would judge words on their own merit alone, but being part of a community and knowing the other posters' history adds even more value to their words--if Kate talks about crystal reports or dronerock I'm going to take her seriously, if poster X has a bad habit of trolling, I'm gong to ignore quite a bit of what that person has to say.

xp surely I'm not the only one with the power to flip the switch?!?

the point of making the proposal was to make it EXPLICIT that the test would be temporary with a GUARANTEED reversion period afterwards. whereupon the decision to change on a more permanent basis could be debated in the LIGHT of experience, rather than with theoretical objections that could turn out to be fantasy.

lots of mini-points:

registration does NOT stop criticism. if anyone can suggest a requirement for registration more minimal than a valid e-mail address. this is NOT an open society anyway because of the existence of mods.

xpost many times

his target was vacuous anarcho-utopian projects to ABOLISH ALL THE RULES, MAN as he (quite rightly) believed that these were ALWAYS cloaks for passive-aggressive regimes of manipulative bullying by other means, where the formal (and perhaps tiresome and fubsy) constitutional axioms are replaced by unspoken and unexamined systems of domination and threat

anyway i'm fine with anything except this ile2 idea. seems like a huge waste of time. either make ile reg-only or don't. starting additional boards seems like a waste.

Will we log-in with a user name and a REAL e-mail address.

If so, will real e-mail addresses be accessible to all, or just mods.

I have experience of a couple of reg use only sites where folks can get your e-mail address and bombard you with all kinds of shite. I'd like to avoid that.

Apologies if this has been covered above.

ile2 seems like a bit of overkill to me as well, I must admit.

jorel said the MAGIC WORDS! the jig is up and the gaff is blown: the whole ilx shuts down forever in T-60 seconds

and in many ways its not a waste of time.

and what is this shed seven bullshit

The trial period and the post-trial period should be of equal lengths though.

registered users have a PUBLIC e-mail address (which appears next to each post) and an OPTIONAL private e-mail address. if you want to make your public address googleproof or nonsense, or funny, whatever, the private address must still be valid. (because changing these posts a new password to the private address if it exists, otherwise the public one)

It says this next to the private address on the users page: "If your other address is not suitable for sending forgotten passwords, enter a working address here. No part of this address will be made public."

there is also a tickbox that allows registered users to WEBMAIL you at the private address. UNTICK this if you don't want to be webmailed.

that the mods were not democratically elected has ALWAYS BEEN TRUE. this is not a democratically based board

xpost I think you'll find that nay sayers have been painstakingly considered on this thread. Like I said above, there's lots of good arguments against not doing it but they're all speculative - I have yet to see one argument against trying it out, other than "I don't trust the mods to put it back", which is worse than patronising in my book.

We've been around five years. In all that time, the ILE/ILM mods were NEVER 'democratically elected.'

Anthony, if you're feeling patronized, I might suggest it's because so many of us here are fantastically fed up with your misreading of so much that's going on, and are trying to keep from losing our temper, as Andrew F. suggested.

This thread has made me even more right wing than before. Haha.

if people don't like the ILE2 idea it will be pretty easy for them to ignore and avoid it. i doubt i will use it myself.

exactly. so why even bother with it?

I am happy that this has been presented as a fait accompli as I am very grateful that there are people who are prepared to spend time and energy on making ILX happen for lazy sods like me.

Heh. The last time I said something along these lines I made someone cool cyberhate me. I've been considering getting a t-shirt made.

surely if we had democratic style elections, with one citizen, one vote, we would have to define 'citizen'!

since the FAKE ANARCHIST UTOPIANS are threatening that the WORLD AS WE KNOW IT WILL END (and they will LEAVE) unless the OLD SYSTEM IS RETAINED IN PERPETUITY, alan suggested a compromise position, ie that during the trial a non-restricted version also continued

(actually he proposed it in advance of their "criticisms" but since ANARCHO-UTOPIANISM disdains actually reading any proposal -- since it constitutes a "restriction on our freedom not to know what we're talking about" -- they complained anyway

its not a case of perserving anarachist utopian, its a case of if it aint broke dont fix it.

many admins (most?) think there is a broken element to ile

The fact is that when a community becomes established, the minority will get less say in these matters. And I do agree with one troll who said that sometimes (although she/he probably thinks always) the persons not agreeing in a very active way are considered trollerish (or whatever). Look at how people are jumping on Anthony? Sure he's pretty vocal about his dislike, but still...
That's the way it is, Anthony, as soon as some consensus is reached, people won't take the opinion of one person (or a few) into consideration.. Personally I'm against it. Why? Because 1 trolls won't be deterred from posting nastiness on ILE, 2 I'm sure the trolls find it exceedingly laughable that we are discussing this matter when they'll just continue doing what they do. I find it deplorable that there were pics on the Liz thread, but registration won't stop this person in my opinion. I do find it extremely interesting seeing this discussion develop.

set up a crappy gmail account!

I agree that a lot of "trolls" are nothing of the sort.

One more time for the world: LET'S TRY IT AND FIND OUT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PERMANENT!

i am still interested to see how the experment would pan out though.

if we do try it it will be permanaent and ile2 will atrophy, i will put any of the v. little money i have on it...

(That's for ignoring, btw)

Wow, you know how to make text bold and use all caps. Good for you! Maybe you could also make it move around!

As far as I know I'm still free to voice my opinion, even if it doesn't belong to the majority. Right? Or is that a new rule.

TAKE A FRIGGING CHILL PILL.

:-)

If you think it will be permanent because of mod/admin chicanery, then show some evidence; otherwise, it just looks like a petulant temper tantrum.

If you think it will be permanent because it will be voted in at the end of the trial period, then what the fuck's the problem? There's your democratic ILX right there.

Source: Spurio Data Garnering Union (SPUDGUN)

Let's get it on from the 1st of September!

xpost - We should call the new board I Love Everything, and rename ILE I Love Organised Fun.

truly anonymous/doppleganger users can still exist. registration just makes it harder for bots to post here.

i can see where people are coming from re: the folks who refuse to register anywhere... it's too bad there's not another alternative for those types.
m.

i am not accusing any mods of chicanrey, just that i dont think its possible to do a hands up on a forum like this. & how it was presented, imho is still problematic, but im almost convinced (this is bullshit, but you know what i mean)

maybe for the vote we could set up an email and a netural tabulator

which i'm assuming could be made to not appear on the thread list unless you're logged in

i think this is better because someone happening upon the board would not immediately know what they were being kept from seeing, therefore less motivated to fuck with it

you'd see a big huge message board, just minus the 'sensitive' threads

I was looking for the Walking Contradiction single to post here... but it seems there wasn't one.

I welcome our new ILOrder.

Wait -- is THIS the most important meeting in your life?

ironic perhaps that the best way to actually vote is to have everyone registered?

i like how the new ilx will be like turning from a jungle of barbarians to a country of citizens who have to be accountable.

well we all know how that works out

er eh wot no you just couldn't post on them shurely. wow i'm confused and i have SO MUCH WORK TO DO, aaaarses. i liked kate's idea about being able to ban yourself :)

If, in order to maintain ILE as all of the above, the people whose time and effort we're happy to enjoy to our advantage decided to try an administration method that may solve many of the developing problems every online community is prone to, then the readers of ILE should take a long hard look at what they've had up to now for free (I am taking any donations made in the past as voluntary and therefore not capable of denying my main point, I hope people agre) and be prepared to accept that theirs is no god-given right to have their cake, eat it and then shout at others for trying to change the colour of the icing.

which really mean i should dictate everything that goes on here.

you'd see a big huge message board, just minus the 'sensitive' threads

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE can we have an "I love sensitive thread" board?!?!?! where everything is logged out??? this will save me loads of time browsing through crap threads when i just want to hear about people's dirty secrets.

i'm not kidding here.

Wasn't this voted down already, like a year ago?

And NOBODY'S going to use ILE2, there's no point in even making it.

The pickle bar's only next door, chum. Oh, and it's registration only so you might not like it very much.

Oh, and ILX Poker Players Unite - sorry dude.

i've made four or five mod requests recently: a couple about spam; one about a knob-end troll i inflamed who went on a rampage and fucked up some other threads with (mildly amusing, i have to admit) abuse about me; a couple about minor thread-titling issues etc. each one has been dealt with astonishingly quickly; if it hasn't been dealt with, someone has explained why. for chrissake, the "service" i get as a "user" from the unpaid mods here is better than i get pretty much anywhere else in my life.

and i don't know and have never met any of the mods or admins. (tom and i do have a mutual IRL friend, but i'm not sure if tom knows that.) he, or any of the others, could be punching me in the balls and i'd be none the wiser.

That said, the ratio of worthwhile non-user posting to worthwhile non-user posting, even being charitable, has gotta be like 20/80 (jeans-girl inclusive), so whatever, I won't complain about this. Though I do think it might backfire into regulars doing their trolling under alternate logins, and mods calling them out on it, and then everyone getting into long ultra-personal grudge matches that spill over everywhere, as currently happens whenever someone gets snotty under their real name.

And let's not lionize the mods: though personally I think they're all kind to volunteer, and though I have no beef with any of them personally, they're hardly the only people who've volunteered to do the job.

If you're complaining about spam, a thread-title, or blatant abuse things are quickly changed. I've no complaint about that. But if you're asking for an actual moderation (and not just traffic cop duty) it's practically impossible to get anything done.

i don't know marcello either, but believe me: if i knew who that troll was, i'd be attempting to track them down so i could rip their head off and shit down their neck.

ile in going further up it's own ass shockah!

To be fair, THE thread (but not some fallout stuff, including something related to a criminal matter in which my name is ubiquitous)
was removed but only after four days of back and forth and me arguing for its removal. And it wasn't one mod who responded (I just checked email) but two. One who told me 'no removal' and took a dig at me, and the other who told me 'yes.'

nobody ever responded to my repeated requests to get rid of and/or out someone impostering (?) me ON A MOD BORED THREAD. but that wasn't really that big a deal, and otherwise i've found the mods to be awesomely good about stuff. so that was kinda puzzling to me. anyway mods are human just like the rest of us (shocker!) and consistency is probably too much to ask for given how few there are. perhaps there should be more mods. i'd nominate myself but i'm sure it'd be shouted down (tho i'm on ilx a lot, and despite disagreeing with people sometimes i sure as hell have no interest in silencing anybody).

Speaking personally I don't think of myself as one, I'm an old-timer with mod powers and I admit I just stick to the traffic cop stuff.

(We also need more people who know their way around the code.)

Friend of c-man? Dan now you talking crazy.

also the general guideline is you can get deleted attacks on you but not necc. what you say about other ppl.

generally if the situation is a mess the mods probably should act fast (deletion being "non-perm" would help here -- i.e. the decision could later be overturned, at least for a period) but there's also a wariness about ppl. asking mods to delete lots of stuff they posted -- the whole slippery slope thing, etc.

shit can be locked.

anyway i'm glad we're having this debate out in the open. that's a good thing.

Also, let us recall that NOTHING HAPPENED TO JESS HARVELL WHEN HE EDITED MY POSTS TO "HUMOROUS" EFFECT.

Also, are we naive enough to think that anyone who cares to spend their free time trolling ilx couldn't be arsed to sign up for a hotmail account and register?

also let us recall that NOTHING HAPPENED TO JW WHEN HE PULLED STUPID HTML TRICKS TO BREAK ILX REPEATEDLY.

i mean he pointed out, as ppl. noted, actual code flaws along the way. but rather than tell the mods then go public gradually and only if they ignored the problem, he decided to go nuts with his 'sploit for as long as he could.

I agree with this so much it kind of scares me.

YES BECAUSE WE KNOW THE CODERS FIX EVERY PROBLEM POINTED OUT TO THEM. WITNESS -- POXY FULES, BROKEN TRACKBACKS, THREAD LOCKING CRASHING ILX!

noise board "ironic" anti-semitism,

WHAT? We are only homophobic thank you very much anonymous dickhead who can't be arsed to put a name to your accusations. Serious issues my ass.

specially how regulars regularly get away with nasty shit all the time ie. noise board "ironic" anti-semitism, homophobia etc, certain dudes bullying each other etcetc.

yes, clearly none of these things existed, esp. not on ilx, before the noize bored. right.

i don't see all that much sleazy stuff, honestly. please point out some examples. and certainly it would probably help speaking out about that stuff AS IT HAPPENS as opposed to bitching anonymously about it on a later thread like a passive-aggressive wuss.

But fair enough, I wasn't meant to single the Noise Board out, they were just examples, don't get defensive dude.

thing is, we're ALWAYS the examples and while i don't think any of us (hahaha "us" like i speak for noize dudes or something) are angels, like, ilxors without sin should cast the first motherfucking stone.

And I don't get why Noise Dude gatekeepers still can't understand that using the word "faggot" is still offensive to some people!

"we" do understand it's offensive! we just don't give a fuck! neither do the actual homosexuals who post to the noize bored, as far as i know!

has everything to do with you being passive-aggressive and thus, not worthy of taking seriously at all. get one backbone.

i don't usually even call my gay friends who call themselves faggots faggots, but hey, whatever.

passive-aggressiveness has no gender specificity, that i'm aware. try another way of skewing what i'm saying, please. actually, on second hand, don't.

PROPORTIONALLY.

"we" do understand it's offensive! we just don't give a fuck! neither do the actual homosexuals who post to the noize bored, as far as i know!

If you read the board attentively an not just with a prejudicial desire to catch them out, you'll see this is true.

Xx4.9 post

THEN WHAT IS THE BARREL FOR, MR MAN?

xxxxpost i rest my case bye.

Um, Calum actually fucked-over people offboard.

Indeed he did. It's a key reason patience finally ran out with him.

my point the entire time has been that us not knowing who you are IS your passive-agressiveness. get one reading comprehension.

xcellent xpost w/ blountz

Complicated things in being complicated shocker.

See, I agree with this and think it's one of the main reasons why I'm fine with ILE being registered only. But of course, there are plenty of people on ILX who prefer the dishonest discourse to the honest discourse.

http://www.myartisttree.com/mk/images/murals/universal_studios_murals/UIOA_Dr-Seuss%20sneeches%20mural%202_by_Michael_Kingery.jpg

Guys, guys!
Really, don't you think this is all kind of out of control?
Any random person could be the troll!
Hateful current posters or maybe someone from our past!
And everyone has their pet theories, my guess is they'll never last!

As for the point of the ILE2 board, I think there is at least one - it avoids those who don't want to log in going and posting ILE stuff on ILM, or the noise board, or what have you.

Obviously they aren't going to get a rise out of us with their actions, no sir. And they certainly won't be inspired to go through extra registration steps, just to be ignored so completely.

As far as I'm concerned, the only acceptable argument for registered only would be if the spam thing is completely out of control. Otherwise, no thanks.

ethan we were offended by the badness of yr garu g imitation: get one better mimicry plz (this wz moderation as Darwinian Selector Mechanism, comedy dept) (this dept has been a bit sluggish coming on-line, we are trying to teach stevem not to hate fun)

jon is v.dry and funny on this thread, blount also

i have turned into the pinefox apparently

Or, a brief 10pt synopsis of my opinions on the subject

1. Anyone posting pictures of decomposing bodies on the memorial thread of a much-loved poster where their nearest and dearest could see it is an utter cunt and has no rights whatsoever on this board. Ditto offensive posts on the anniversary of someone's wife's death. I'm sure you all agree with this, and if you don't I'm not sure I respect your opinion.

2. Actually controlling these people is very difficult indeed unless we have some way of getting a handle on them - ie through compulsory registration and IP lookup, which at least makes them bannable or warnable.

3. "Freedom of speech" is not an issue. If you stand in a library and repeatedly shout "my arse is smelly!" you will be kicked out. If you walk straight into someone else's memorial service and shout "he was a wanker and he deserved it!" and then refuse to leave, you could well be arrested. What, exactly, is the difference between ILE and the real world here?

4. The majority of people who are arguing against a temporary experiment in compulsory registration are not, generally speaking, the ones who spend a huge amount of time here, bar the occasional very involved discussion.

5. The Noize Board is irrelevant to this discussion. Stop talking about it.

6. So are Spambots. Really, if you're that concerned about them, the only way forward is to make EVERYTHING registered only.

7. Projecting sinister agendas onto board admins who are doing their best to try and make this a more pleasant place frankly is out of order.

8. Possibly the most controversial - ILE and ILM are *supposed* to be better than the rest of the Internet. This does not mean the implementation of a Stalinist regime but it does mean that things like anonymous personal attacks and random spamming aren't welcome. This goes right back to the very foundation of the boards and no one should be in the slightest bit surprised when the very people who founded this place take a stand over things they (justifiable IMO) find objectionable.

9. If anyone uses the 'black people not allowed into racist pubs' analogy to counter this they will be kicked repeatedly in the nuts for incompetant and offensive reasoning.

10. No one has given ANY REASON WHATSOEVER why this should not be tried on a TEMPORARY and DEMOCRATIC basis (see also 7).

Personally, I'd moderate them all myself and make them about group sex or fisting, but you can't have everything.

this is retarded, ilx is not an actual physical library or memorial service. you can ignore "trolls" just like anyone ignores anything they dont like or arent interested in

11. There is NO POINT WHATSOEVER pretending that ILE is just a message board. It's a real community centred around people who have a genuine web of complex personal relationships with one another and have been through a fuck of a lot with each other. It's not 'only' a message board even for the most casual of observers and if you think otherwise, see the last bit of No. 2.

(Also see my point upthread about people who hardly ever post here talking about this place in abstractions)

i don't think i ever have before, but i totally agree with mr. trife.

I find it easier to debate with the people who talk about what is actually happening rather than leap into extreme hyperbole, as Ethan and Anthony for example are both doing.

This won't be settled by debate anyway. No amount of argument will lead to everyone being on the same side. My impression is that there is a substantial majority in favour of the proposed experiment on the proposed terms. Who is to make the decision that we have reached a point where it will or won't happen?

GENUINE ACTUAL OBJECTION - the registration process is a bit shit and slow and last time I tried to register under an assumed name it took days for my details to arrive in my email. I'm not sure this is a regular thing but until the problems are ironed out it might genuinely deter new posters.

And saying that the moderators are planning for racism, etc., is crossing a very obvious line of stupidity.

NO FUCKING WAY, FUCK THIS.

the trolls arent bad, and isolating ourselves as a cute little elite will atrophy the boards--i hate this idea, loathe it.

the best of ilx is free and open discourse, debating and fighting in the open.

snobbish wankery, this plan...against the whole philospohy of the place. (ie the geezers manifesto)

im gone if this happens.

-- anthony easton

Registration would "kill" ILx assholedom sorta the same way triclosan kills germs: it'll scare off the really casual trolls (and the spambots) but the really determinedly offensive motherfuckers will still keep on keeping on.

I don't know who decides what is trolling - the mods, as ever, I suppose. This doesn't change that, or the decision to delete a post by Ned/Dan/you/someone we don't yet know.

(xpost - you people are insane. Seriously)

The Momus point is a good one - but how does registering change that? We still have the ability to delete Momus posts now, but haven't, and I'm not aware of posts of similar nature from SomeoneElse having been treated differently.

Gerry, anonymous threads will be facilitated, and your paranoia that people will assume that the mods haven't been using their abilities to track the originator now, but will in the future, is not a universal truth.

can we still ban kenan though? i still haven't forgiven him for being a mad t.v. hating motherfucker. if that's alright with everyone. can we ban el-p if he shows up too, please. he hates me.

but is that or similar the only concern? is it irreversibly in the past? how likely is it to recur?

now i can see that making my proposal could be a CLEVER DOUBLE BLUFF. i could JUST DO IT (which i or other mods could) at any moment and the non-regs wouldn't even get a say, but how much more fun would it be to have a 600+ thread debating it first. the fools would walk into my clever trap.

now there are MODS - that is a given, and though some people wanted to make this thread question the entire mod system, i'm not going to address it. also there isn't ONE mod, so this isn't something that can be railroaded on to all of them - the mods disagree on this issue too.

so points 3 on of the proposal are going to be upheld unless there is a conspiracy of mods, and like i say, why bother when they could just bloody do it anyway?

You have no idea how tempting this is, just for the hell of it... I'm going to sleep for about 16 hours as well.

I was talking in terms of how prepared people are to speak openly. As I said on the other thread, no-one is truly anonymous, but this seems to be a further step away from what little anonymity we have on the Internet. Tracing an IP address to an ISP is one thing, but as I understand it what is being discussed is, in effect, ticking a box saying "I am Onimo but don't tell anyone". I just think it will limit the scope of discourse as many people will shy away from it.

(that took fucking ages to type, I can't even think about reading the xposts)

But you will already be Onimo, you'll just be checking a box that says "forget who I am for a minute". You won't have to present your secret decoder ring to post anonymously, or as yourself. Like Alan said on the other thread, everyone has only ever had to register once ever, and that number won't be going up after this change (I think).

---
And, as it happens, there is a feeling among the mods -- I will not claim universal, but a clear majority -- that there is enough spambot trouble to give this a try.

Let me reemphasize -- to give this a *TRY*.

I am not, bluntly put, impressed by the sky-is-falling arguments being advanced that this changes everything, that the idea being mooted destroys an aesthetic irreparably. It is an experiment that can be revoked. In fact, to be honest, I find the idea of two months to be a bit much -- I'd suggest one, or maybe even a couple of weeks.

But I still believe the idea is worth trying. Because even if it fails miserably then it is at least clearer *how* it fails miserably -- suppositions may be thoroughly correct *or* incorrect on both sides of the argument. And unlike, say, oh, I don't know, some bit of power-politics somewhere in the world near the Tigris and Euphrates rivers these days, nobody's going to die because of a brief experiment, to put it mildly.

Hyperbolic in terms of comparison? No more so than some of the emotional gamesmanship that's been played here by many posters where understandable objections are being swallowed in impact by a series of "OMG END TIMES!" responses.

The world will not end.

I agree.

But I still believe the idea is worth trying. Because even if it fails miserably then it is at least clearer *how* it fails miserably -- suppositions may be thoroughly correct *or* incorrect on both sides of the argument.

I'm not sure it will be clear. What if, in those, say, 3 weeks, we lose Conner Smedley because he couldn't figure out how to register. Is that worth it? Maybe, but we aren't certain of knowing. The world will not end. The sky will not fall. But we will not be werewolves, and we will not howl.

This message is served as a note of caution to those to seek to make literary analogies on messages boards. And don't go leaving trails of crumbs to other threads so you can find your way back.

i think my grabbing of 8 weeks out of the air was a feeling that this would be enough to make a serious go of it, and would be convincing enough that the final decision would last some time cos it was based on a substantial experience. i.e. i imagined coming to the end of 3 or 4 weeks and there being a feeling of "hmm, it felt like it was changing for the good/worse" and this being brought up again every year/ 6 mnths. this should finally get us off the fence and decide whether it will make a difference or not rather than debate it every year.

Experiments are always a bad idea.

And Matt's point 11 is OTM. We're a community, we look after the old, the infirm, the people who are going through a rough patch, or who have just plain started to suck. Because they're our friends. ILX isn't the vicious Darwinian locker-room it clearly was in Trife's heyday, and it's not going to go back. You'll just have to head back to.. what do you head back to? I know this is like your tenth goodbye, but there must be something out there, right? You can't spend all your time pretending to be George Clinton on the Pitchfork message boards.

I do understand what you Mods call the troll problem, I haven't been viciously attacked, but have been, I guess "harassed" is a good word albeit mildly by people who don't share my views, but that is part of life and debates isn't it? Not everyone agrees with everything said, and how boring it would be if everyone agreed with each other on every little thing; what would be the use of the board other than a mutual admiration society. Anyway someone please tell me what I need to do to register properly and I will get it done.

this is true, but as far as i know, those powers have never been exerted. it's a fail-safe, basically.

http://forestisle.com/images/gate.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/76/Boca_Bayou_gate_house.jpg

dude what the fuck are you talking about?? ive only ever posted one 'fuck ilm im out' thread (in 2002!!) and ive never posted to the pitchfork board. look i was arguing in this thread mostly to defend anthony who gets shitted on waaaay too much here lately despite being one of the few worthwhile posters left (enjoy yalls brave new ilx w/ no art threads), i wanted to stick up for his mostly correct opinion on here and post a few of my own but-

"One of the things that ILX is, is somewhere where we don't have to tolerate 'clowning', where we don't have to have that most abhorrent of social necessities, a "thick skin"."

says it all really, you ppl are just whiny pussies

Because it will drive away a large number of posters who won't be around to vote against it?

And I don't understand what could lead someone to say "this board feels worse" after those 8 weeks. If we miss out on a lot of random insanity, how would we even know? It's not like these things come on a regular schedule.

I think it'll be an easy thing (although a coder would have to do it) to put a note of explanation at the bottom of the thread directing people to the appropriate mod request board thread where unregistered posters could discuss this issue during the trial period.

i just say we give it a try, that's all. And then we can still have our 800-post threads arguing over it afterwards, too.

Ant/Ethan/Yellow's arguments just Do Not Wash. Registering will ruin "free discourse"??? HOW? Seriously - please, tell me how. Right now, as this very "free discourse" is happening already, the majority of people, including ones against the idea of registration (hilariously) are ALREADY REGISTERED USERS. Having to register wont stop being able to post gifs, or make jokes, or have 1000 post discourses on postmodernism goes up its own arse, or - heaven forbid - "cuddlethons" (wtf is this "cuddle" thing anyway? I dont get it).

All you have to do is set up a login name with any old email address, ONCE. You can call yourself hey-anony-mo for all I care. Register once, thats it. You dont even have to log in more than once unless you repeatedly swap PCs or are some kind of loon who doesnt allow cookies.

I again ask: what, really, is going to CHANGE if this is tried? The fact people who already have registered logins are saying "wah, I'll leave" is baffling and hilarious.

avert your eyes, Trayce; it's more horrifying than you'd ever imagine

Anyway, that digresses from the subject to hand so I'll quit.

For support, I offer the fact that there are 6000+ users currently registered on ILX. How many are on this board? Certainly not 6000. As a result, please stop using the "majority of ILXer's" argument, because it just ain't neccesarily so...

By the way, before anyone uses the "If they cared enough about the board, they would have voiced their opinions on this thread." nonsense, please take a look at what you are supporting...and whether the supposed groundswell of support is actually a good, solid place to stand on.

Again, if the boards are being glutted with spam (and in all honesty, only the mods would actually know and (let me make this clear) I TRUST THEM IMPLICITLY IN THIS MATTER), and reg-only would help stem the flow of this crap, then fine. But let's not pretend that this is some troll-related issue if it's not. And if it is, then I think we're misstepping rather severely, and doing so under false pretenses.

What will being registered stop any regular here from doing? Anything? No.

some places shouldn't have e.g. racist crap in them (say, e.g., major magazines -- wishful thinking tho, i know) but other places, which are clearly, should be allowed to, so that it can be respondeded to instead of just rendered polite and whispered.

HUGGLEZ FOR CALZ!

I'm just saying that someone should stand up and say "Spambots are the reason for the change, and anti-trolling is an added (in their opinion, not mine) benefit", not the other way around. And if the anti-trolling is the primary concern, I think that we need to have an actual, impossible to achieve vote before making any changes. Which, I think, would be defeated by A) those of us that are crazy enough to think that anon-trolls (outside of the aforementioned reprehensible attacks) aren't worth getting all wound up about and modifiying a board that seems to be working just fine and B) The vast majority of ILX that honestly couldn't give a shit either way, which in my book counts as a vote for the status quo don't fuck with it side.

Also, I'd like to think that it may mean mods will have LESS cleaning up to do, and this will put a lot less strain on the SQL server that doesnt seem to be coping too well with locks/deletions right now.

I'm still not seeing any answers as to why this is such a bad thing, considering every other damn board everywhere already does this.

And yet this board is miles better than those boards...

Don't knock USENET, USENET rules.

However, I think a frank discussion of whether trolling etc can be fixed by registration is fine. (I, of course, disagree.)

All of whom used to have logins. Why'd they ditch them?

(OK yes, Jon with his cookies thing has a point, I agree there).

By the way, Trayce, you are correct in noting that the people on this thread (for the most part) wouldn't have noticed the login requirement. Of course, that doesn't have any bearing on the future posters-to-be, some of which, shockingly, might be worth hearing from and turned off by the login requirement. The point is, we don't know, and even 2 months of isolation might be (in my opinion) too much. Seriously, arguing from the "I don't mind being logged in" position sort of excludes us (myself included) from being able to comment on the motivations/willingness of others to do so. Not all of which, I imagine, are pricks.

Sterling, as we discussed in the other thread, I too think that the spam issue needs to be divorced from this. Do you have an objection to this post I made?

I don't think that my proposal would be subject to all that many false positives as it requires 3 conditions for a post to be rejected:

1) not logged in
2) a url in post
3) matching keyword

How many not logged in people are discussing links to sites about poker?

Or are you just an uppity little shit who can't find a real reason to disagree with me?

Ps - you're a felcher!

As I said on the other thread, no-one is truly anonymous, but this seems to be a further step away from what little anonymity we have on the Internet. Tracing an IP address to an ISP is one thing, but as I understand it what is being discussed is, in effect, ticking a box saying "I am Onimo but don't tell anyone". I just think it will limit the scope of discourse as many people will shy away from it.

Forcing registration will *not* reduce your anonymity. Because - as far as the mods/admins are concerned - you don't have any, at least not if you're a regular user who logs out occasionally.

I'm not a mod myself, but whenever I post anonymously I assume that the mods will know who it is, just because it's so easy for them to do so. My home IP address only changes every week or two, and the two work IPs I post from shouldn't change at all.

I have my own website, and I've been a website admin (of one kind or another) for several years, so I know how easy it is to trace things like this already. For example, yesterday I posted a link to my new under-construction website on ILX. It was only clicked 7 times, but I immediately spotted that one of them was Mark C, at his office. If I was an ILX admin too, I'd be identify *all* of the posters who had followed that link very quickly.

(OK, this is an extreme case, because I know Mark works for a small company with a distinctive name. But that's not the point)

Which, in turn, assumes that people are going to be willing to experiment with something and then make a rational decision based on the results, instead of the usual conservative "my preconceived views are right and anything else means DOOM" response.

Fat chance of that, then.

(xpost to Jon)

Hello again.
Can I ask two simple, easily answerable questions, that might (happily or no) expediate this discussion>

A) This change has already been decided upon, I assume? Would it be possible for a mod to simply post that this is going to happen, at which point I can direct my anti-reg attentions elsewhere? If the decision is set in stone, so be it...I would rather not continue to rail against what is already set into motion. A clear statement of the actual reasons behind the change (spam/trolling/iron-fisted control of the masses - kidding) would also be nice. I'm not distrustful of all y'all, I just want to know why this issue came to the forefront and was acted upon. Also (not to be snarky), please don't claim that it is due to the will of the collective masses or whatever. Because I think that it's obvious that it isn't, and my (and others) posts above seem to point to the fact that not everyone is in agreement.

B) Could a mod also clarify how this post-experiment voting thing is going to work (how/when/will non-registered users be allowed to vote/how many "participants" are required to make the change) to assuage my worries and speculations?

Thanks much. I will gladly trade my vitriol for factual information.

By the way, if the topic is still open to discussion for this "experiment" happening, I vote no again.

-- John Justen (johnjuste...), August 27th, 2005.

Unless, of course, they've got genital herpes or something else nasty and contagious down there. Then, suggesting someone suck their dick would be a pretty insulting suggestion.

And in my other browser i am logged in with my regular ip address and login

LOL

Oh, I am so tired. But I still have time for the (vaguely) funny, even within all this acrimony. Best to all.

my dick was four feet long in the fifth grade.

Seriously. I'm going to bed to avert the passing out. Nighty-night all.

My friend Billy
Had a 10-foot willy,
He showed it to the girl next door.
She thought it was a snake
And hit it with a rake,
And now it's only six feet four.

Vagina jokes are acceptable also, for the dick-challenged.

Again, I love you despite myself, ILX.

Ethan's pussy whining upthread was cute because I had a thread deleted from the Noise Board once because a mod deemed it unfunny. I cried for days so can really understand his pain and frustration. I just thought perhaps Noiseboardesque threads on ILE ('the wrong place') should be moderated in the Noiseboardesque way. Sadly/fortunately I can't move threads to other boards myself unlike other mods.

Personally I'm still adamant that people are clutching at straw(man)s re their arguments for why reg only will damage ILE irrevocably, regardless of whether it's permanent or merely temporarily. Another 700 posts will not change this. Jus' sayin like.

Normally I think about poker as much I think about hot lesbian porn (i.e., never), and find Slate to be a bunch of characterless pussies, but to their credit, this Slate diary by poker player Paul Phillips impressed me greatly. Turns out they're all high on prescription drugs, unsurprisingly.

Why are there no great poker-playing girls?

Of course not, people have made up their mind and what will change it? It seems you don't really take these so-called straws into consideration, otherwise you wouldn't deem them *straws* but valuable arguments.

i agree with this, and then just plz do jon's fix for poker spam

I didn't even know about registering until a few days ago - I think I did it so I could see the statscock.

Why are there no great poker-playing girls?

Jennifer Tilly

That's a fair point. I don't think many posters have been driven off by spam and trolls, but I guess there could be some who never posted at all because of a bad first impression.

I was hoping to be at least a little bitch.

the answer is in the question

I have like a million things I'd say about this if not for the fact that I don't much care one way or the other.

Jon has repeatedly brought up the "four lines of code" spam-filtering idea, and I think it's unworkable as is, for precisely the reasons Sterling has mentioned, possibly on another thread. Hardwiring that into the code as-is is a bad idea, not just because of the false positives but also because it means people will come running to the programmers every time you wanted a new spam word bashed into the code, and I'm sure none of them need to have to deal with that.

What may be more workable for the long term--and something that would require more programming, naturally--would be to integrate into the code something similar to the Spam Karma plugin available for personal blogging software like WordPress: you have this plugin that scans the posts and compares it against a separate list of keywords--a list that can be updated as necessary, either manually or from a master list of well-known spam keywords provided by the people that programmed Spam Karma. The downside is that it would introduce additional load onto the server for EVERY SINGLE POST...not an ideal situation while we're already dealing with semi-regular poxy fules.

I should note that implementing this will also make it impossible for me to post from my cell phone, which I've done semi-regularly, also because of the broken cookie issue. This isn't the case on other forums that run different software: phpBB seems to send out cookies my Treo can recognize and use for logged-in posting. ILX does not. If this is seriously your main reason for not wanting registration, Jon, perhaps figuring out why the cookies are borked might be worth you using your mad I-can-do-this-shit-in-only-four-lines-of-code skillXors.

Sean, it's weird.... I seem to have problems with ILX'S cookies in everything that isn't a standalone desktop web browser.

well-known spam keywords provided by the people that programmed Spam Karma. The downside is that it would introduce additional load onto the server for EVERY SINGLE POST.

Why not just for not logged in users.

Anyway, you ivory tower nerds are fine and good, but you are forgetting that coding takes time. Why not implement the trivial filter until a robust solution is created. The spam is out of control. The idea of plugging an existing solution into the ILX architecture is a good idea. Someone look around on freshmeat or sourceforge for some code that can be grafted onto ILX that solves this.

Chief Justice Warren delivered the opinion of the Court.

These cases come to us from the States of Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware. In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis. In each instance, they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race. This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the 14th Amendment...The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws. Argument was heard in the 1952 Term, and reargument was heard this Term on certain questions propounded by the Court.

Reargument was largely devoted to the circumstances surrounding the adoption of the 14th Amendment in 1868. It covered exhaustively consideration of the Amendment in Congress, ratification by the states, then existing practices in racial segregation, and the views of proponents and opponents of the Amendment. This discussion and our investigation convince us that, although these sources cast some light, it is not enough to resolve the problem with which we are faced. At best, they are inconclusive. The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among "all persons born or naturalized in the United States." Their opponents, just as certainly, were antagonistic to both the letter and the spirit of the Amendments and wished them to have the most limited effect. What others in Congress and the state legislature had in mind cannot be determined with any degree of certainty.

An additional reason for the inconclusive nature of the Amendment's history, with respect to segregated schools, is the status of public education at that time. In the South, the movement toward free common schools, supported by general taxation, had not yet taken hold. Education of white children was largely in the hands of private groups. Education of Negroes was almost nonexistent, and practically all of the race were illiterate. In fact, any education of the Negroes was forbidden by law in some states. Today, in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world. It is true that public school education has advanced further in the North, but the effect of the Amendment on Northern States was generally ignored in the congressional debates. Even in the North, the conditions of public education did not approximate those existing today. The curriculum was usually rudimentary; ungraded schools were common in rural areas; the school term was but three months a year in many states; and compulsory school attendance was virtually unknown. As a consequence, it is not surprising that there should be so little in the history of the 14th Amendment relating to its intended effect on public education.

In the first cases in this Court construing the 14th Amendment, decided shortly after its adoption, the Court interpreted it as proscribing all state-imposed discriminations against the Negro race. The doctrine of "separate but equal" did not make its appearance in this Court until 1896,...involving not education but transportation. In this Court, there have been six cases involving the "separate but equal" doctrine in the field of public education. In Cumming v. County Board of Education...and Gong Lum v. Rice,...the validity of the doctrine itself was not challenged. In more recent cases, all on the graduate school level, inequality was found in that specific benefits enjoyed by white students were denied to Negro students of the same educational qualifications... In none of these cases was it necessary to reexamine the doctrine to grant relief to the Negro plaintiff. And in Sweatt v. Painter the Court expressly reserved decision on the question whether Plessy v. Ferguson should be held inapplicable to public education.

In the instant cases, that question is directly presented. Here, unlike Sweatt v. Painter, there are findings below that the Negro and white schools involved have been equalized or are being equalized, with respect to buildings, curricula, qualifications and salaries of teachers, and other "tangible" factors. Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases. We must look instead to the effect of segregation itself on public education.

In approaching this problem, we cannot turn the clock back to 1868 when the Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896 when Plessy was written. We must consider public education in the light of its full development and its present place in American life throughout the Nation. Only in this way can it be determined if segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws.

Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principle instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.

We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does. In Sweatt in finding that a segregated law school for Negroes could not provide them equal educational opportunities, this Court relied in large part on "those qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness in a law school." In McLaurin, the Court, in requiring that a Negro admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again resorted to intangible considerations: "[his] ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." Such considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools. To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their heart and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. The effect of this separation on their educational opportunities was well stated by a finding in the Kansas case by a court which nevertheless felt compelled to rule against the Negro plaintiffs: "Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law; for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to retard the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a [racially] integrated school system." Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority. Any language in Plessy v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected.

We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. This disposition makes unnecessary any discussion whether such segregation also violates the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the consideration of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question -- the constitutionality of segregation in public education. We have now announced that such segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have the full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will be restored to the docket, and the parties are requested to present further argument...

It is so ordered.

2. Make use of the preview function. The preview checkbox that sits next to the post button is a powerful tool that will show you exactly how your post, profile picture and signature will look before you add it to the board. You can use it to check your EZcodes and other formatting, as well as seeing how your profile and signature looks without making 'test' threads, and save yourself from having to fix blatant mistakes with edits.

3. If you have a large picture to display, either in filesize or dimensions, link it. Stretching threads is a no-no, and if it occurs your expected to edit your post to fix it.

4. If you post an external link, please be discerning. We do not need to be inundated with Flash animations and quirky sites. You can share sites with the rest of the board that make you laugh or think, but just try not to make a habit of it, and consequently be sure to only pick the best of the bunch, as mediocre Flash animations are not rare treasures that the world must be notified about. If you're going to post trivial and silly content, it *must* be all ages.

5. Avoid provocative subject matter. Reviving topics like Creationism VS Evolution or gun control, or challenging people's religious convictions are ultimately unproductive and breed bad will. They are not a good way to 'entertain' or 'liven up' the board.

6. If you're not a moderator, don't feel compelled to act like one. If someone is breaking a rule in a way that annoys you or makes you feel uncomfortable, feel free to tell them that you don't think they should be doing that. Do not travel the boards looking for people who you feel are breaking rules so you can tell them off. Do not copy-paste quote sections of the rules at people. Do not warn people of the rules when they first arrive - that can be insulting. If someone is being a nuisance on the board, and a moderator is aware of the situation, consider backing off. Goading and provoking troublemakers takes control of the situation away from the moderator and makes their role more difficult.

7. If you're new to the boards, you can simply join in on existing threads, or start one of your own to announce your presence. If you do start an introduction thread, please take the time to tell us about yourself, because while we're generally friendly and interesting people it's difficult to respond to "Hi I'm new. Bye."

Handy icebreakers include what some of your interests are, how you found this board, if you know anyone who already posts here or even what part of the world you hail from. If you're going to use a new thread to announce yourself, be sure to give us something to go on.

But most of all, just try and be yourself, use your common sense, treat others with understanding and respect and have fun!

Return to the Dragon Tails message board

yeah but if no new posters are posting surely it will be noticed? like, "HEY 2 months on it's still jon williams posting his 4 lines of code! okay fuck this!"

p.s.
maybe we could give ILX some kind of holodeck, for posters who are having a bad day
-- Ronan (ronan.fitzgerald6NOSPA...), August 28th, 2005 3:50 AM. (Ronan) (later) (link)

it's called OUTDOORS :-D

I would suggest that the trial last just a month though - but perhaps it could end sooner if the screams to end the pain grow louder and more numerous as the days drag on.

I've heard about that big room with the blue-grey ceiling, but I try not to go there.

Sorry, private joke.

My main conclusion from all the arguments is that there's a lot of stuff we mods could and should improve before trialling reg-only (clarifying rules, recruiting new mods, etc.).

THAT'S IT! I'M LEAVING! FASCISTS!

And don't beg me to stay, either.

No really, don't beg me. I'm definitely leaving.

In fact, I'll be posting several more times on this thread about my intentions to leave. But I WILL NOT BE SWAYED by any begging or entreaties to stay.

Ciao, Nicole!

And can we eat them?

This was (and still is) done on another board I was on. If you lurked or didn't post enough - I think less than ten posts per week - you were banned. It seemed a bit over the top, but I could understand because it costs a lot of money to maintain that board. I stopped frequenting the board because of some assholish behavior by an ex-moderator.

And the great thing about the fontanelles is that you can stick the skewer through them for the BBQ without having to do any of that nasty trepanning.

And we will push it real good.

This is what the 12 ft lizards really look like. FEAR THEM.

also, i have added the code to start a thread and make it reg-only.

note you must be logged in to make use of this new feature, and if the board is locked, the option doesn't appear