Bittersweet Candy Bowl Forums

I am just happy the real life picture thread still exists. What would I do if I couldn't continue to post my chocolate body for all to see. Thank you for keeping it.

Nice, new rules.

This actually makes me feel a bit more comfortable. I will always be a lurker though.

The "not criticizing mods publicly" part makes a lot of sense to me, dunno why so many people make such a big fuzz about it. Do you really need to make things public?

I have a question about the rules; where do "let's play" type games fit in? Is that unfit for Social Studies? I ask this because I was going to remake this thread before Recess was closed, but now I am not sure if it is permissible.

You want to remake a thread that no one had posted on in over three months? Seriously?

it would be only the most wonderful thing ever that no one would ever want to do

Link to your deviant account
This is a very dated post that you (Suitcase) made in 2006.
I'll save everyone's time by not listing how this contradicts the rule set because it's pretty obvious, and since I don't want to go through soaring rabbit to find more on that i will just go to the next point.
Months ago, as opposed to years ago like this post, you added ads to this site. You did that after stating opinion on some other webcomic discussion site that you oppose mass ads on a webcomic site (or any site) and reasoned that opinion in many ways. The one you kept repeating was that the readers don't owe anything to the site owner, it is rather the other way around. You set rules that contradict the impression you made (in my anonymous opinion), that you value the reader base and abhor a system that relies on bans and childing affairs such as the new rule set.

I am not going to go into semantics or even proof read this. If you regard this as a personal attack against you, here's the bottom line: this is not what you made yourself or this site to be and newcomers will have a laugh at these rules that you could have exchanged with several simple bans that no one that matters would have objected to.

oh look i made the entire post without making a reference to the holocaust or nazi germany i feel like a gem.

yeah but you see that's on a huge community like DA which is a site designed for uploading user content, and suit opposes how that content is regulated. this forum is just a site for people to talk on, like a chatroom or comment section. you aren't entitled or guaranteed anything by coming here, unlike deviantart. you're comparing apples to oranges.

Lefty, on 26 March 2012 - 09:17 PM, said:

But what he said about criticism was specified towards art and not every medium. (Also consider snooths's point too; and Lux's)

This post has been edited by Seppucrow: 26 March 2012 - 09:48 PM

Lefty, on 26 March 2012 - 09:17 PM, said:

Because people's opinions don't change in 6 years. Either he saw a different logic or was talking about a different context or whatever. But seriously, 2006? That's such a large span of time in this context that it can't really be used as evidence. That's like saying someone's still a bully at age 14 because they punched a few people out of temper at age 8.

And what the above two said, too.

This post has been edited by Lux Aeterna: 26 March 2012 - 09:30 PM

Jerk, on 26 March 2012 - 08:29 PM, said:

...It's a let's play. People dont post if I dont update, and I stopped updating because the game was bugged. Since then, the game has been fixed and I'd like to resume the game, and I know quite a few people who are still interested.

Sorry for assuming you'd know how a lets play works.

This post has been edited by Rex: 26 March 2012 - 09:40 PM

If people don't need to post, why do you need an entire thread for it? Is this not something you could do in PMs and profile comments? Because this sounds like a terrible idea.

Also, you'd think if someone went to the trouble to make an account specifically to call out an admin that he'd, you know, get his arguments straight.

Wow, it's like any time I don't check the forum for more than 3 days, I miss something drastic happening.

It's not like this is too extreme anyway. Recess had pretty much devolved into a bunch of games threads with only one or two threads that actually produced any intellectual and stimulating discussions. And I don't get why everyone's making totalitarian government references when it's just a re-emphasis on the mods and admins jobs. There supposed to have the final say on stuff anyway.

As long as we allow some more light-hearted threads in Social Studies (which seems to be the plan anyway) and people cut down on the shit posting (which only really happened in the threads nobody liked anyway) I don't see to much changing on the forum. (Aside from a few people being butthurt for a while about the loss of Recess, but they'll get over it)

Rex, on 26 March 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

Jerk, on 26 March 2012 - 09:43 PM, said:

That is just how a let's play works, and it was rather interesting. If Rex ends up doing it right (As I assume he will) it would actually be an interesting thing.
And Jerk, here is an example of a let's play thread. The readers offer comments to help out with the overall experience.

Wouldn't be better a stream for that?
I don't see the point of making a thread that can take days to update in order to get a single step in a game

But the experience evidently didn't need improvement in three months, so what's the point of creating something someone will necro once in awhile because they don't know any better? I know what it is you want and I still think it's unnecessary and tedious. Is there a reason you can't use the stream thread? This exchange is getting redundant.

Well the issue is that the game is slow, you would update the thread as in game years pass by. Also the whole game is in ASCII so I don't think many folks would be up for watching that for over an hour if they aren't the ones in control.

What is being lost if Rex were to make this thread? There are plenty of other threads in SS that haven't gotten a post in 3 months and the whole SS atmosphere is supposed to be more open to this sort of thing so why not? He could make the thread all about the game Dwarf Fortress and have the Let's Play be a part of it instead of the entire thread, would that work?

Alright, go with God. It can't be any more retarded than the Ponies thread at least. At worst, it'll just drop off the page anyway. I just wanted to know, if the game was still going on, why it would need a thread if it could be sustained without one.

I don't speak for other mods though. If it gets quashed, you'll have to deal with it yourself.

I understand that. Thank you Jerk.

Whoa, Lefty's on my case.

I agree that readers don't owe anything to the site owner, that criticism is good, that lax rules are fundamentally a better idea than stick-up-your-ass complex ones.

However, this community is, for some reason, unable to be interesting under the above regulations. It's not a 4chan. I think this is because many of our readers - particularly those who flock to the forum for "random chat" - have poor taste and are boring. It could also be that for the laissez faire philosophy to work, you need more people participating than we have.

And so, in service of the better-educated, smarter reader, the new rules say "we'll delete shitty posts, ban you for annoying behaviour and won't let you bitch about us publicly while we do it". I'll admit that the "reserve powers" section of the rules is very author-oriented, but I'd say that since Veronica and I have good taste, our arbitrary choices about banning people for merely annoying us will also improve the forum for people better than the average.

In other words - it's still all for the users. If the whole forum turns into an exclusive circlejerk I'll be really annoyed and do what I can to reverse things.

Also, where was that thing about ads? I'm curious, as I don't know what you were looking at.

SuitCase, on 27 March 2012 - 12:58 AM, said:

You kept asking people if they agree with what you posted on the irc and if you worded it right.I regoogled and actually found it this time so here(I had to go through the fucking bad comic wiki before i found this)Link

As for everything else, SuitCase, when I put behind everything i know, all the hilariously pointless shitty drama, kids who post pictures of their dicks online and view this as a new reader this sums up to "We didn't ban before and look where that got us now it's ok to go fucking ballistic" and the people who actually do read the rules of a forum first thing when you go into one are the kind you would actually like to keep.Since Veronica and you have good taste? That is a ridiciously bad first impression.

Edit: Made clarifications.

This post has been edited by Lefty: 28 March 2012 - 06:15 PM

Lefty, on 27 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

I hadn't realized that you were a symbolic representation of all "new readers" everywhere. Stop assuming that everyone shares your own opinion. Seriously, the new rules aren't even that bad. They've defined what forum they want--one that isn't small talk, but not so dreadfully rote that it would scare pretty much everyone away. You're the one who's going "fucking ballistic," considering you got whipped up into a frenzy due to a rule change.

Quote

That's such a flawed generalization that it's laughable. I bet DMLD read the rules because he attempts to be intellectual but he's actually dumb as dirt. And now he's gone. Did any of us want to "keep" him? I know I didn't. Reading the rules doesn't automatically prevent one from being a shitposter. It can help, but to automatically say that someone who read the rules is a good poster has so much margin for error that it hurts.

Quote

"These people have rules! Obviously they're controlling people who want no fun!"

You said you don't "proofread" your stuff? Yeah, it shows.

Lefty, on 27 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

Whoa. Fuck you too, you asshole. "Sexually confused" my ass - maybe I'm jumping to conclusions here but I've no idea how this can be interpreted as anything less than a stab at us who don't conform to the sexual norm. I'm not confused, I know damn well that I'm a woman, just as Nate knows damn well he's a man.

Lefty, on 27 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

This isn't going 'ballistic', you illiterate cunt. It seems that way because before this forum had mods who didn't do shit and let everyone else run free. Now, we actually have sensible rules and regulations. So because everyone can't run around like monkeys and throw shit on the walls, it's 'ballistic'? No, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. All of these rules are perfectly fine, and so long as you don't make hyperboles out of them they also make sense.

Furthermore what Lux says is true; people like DMLD read the rules and they were dirt stupid. Taeshi and SuitCase do have good taste, and those people who are offended by being forced to actually be insightful or funny or even remotely interesting in their comments can take a hike.

It feels like a bit of a shame since what first drew me to the BCB forums was the freedom we enjoyed here. This was back in the old forum, where you didn't even have to log in. I guess it's a consequence of our growth, though. More people makes everything harder to manage and makes it more likely for dicks to show up.

I feel that killing recess is a bad move, though, because people will always want to post some useless stuff. Even if you train the current forumites to obey, the newbies will come and post shit. Having recess there meant that they posted it away from my view and attention. Now it'll happen in Social studies and give the mods more work. But it's your choice in the end.

Relevant, from the IRC:

Quote

Suitcase said:

I think it has more to do with the average age of people here, Suit, and therefore the related levels of maturity.

This post has been edited by Migrant: 27 March 2012 - 10:53 PM

The thing is, if someone posts a bad topic, what will happen? It will get detentioned. Simple. I used to do that consistently before the rule change, the difference is if there's one person in particular that consistently does that, THEN i will warn them to knock it off, and if they don't obey then they get further warnings and suspensions.

It's not a one-strike you're out deal unless there's more to you than just posting a few dumb responses here and there.

The forum used to be good but then it took a suit case to the recess.

RickAstley, on 28 March 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

What does that even attempt to mean?

Lefty, your response is incoherent. I'm not sure what the ad thing has to do with anything - I believe everything in that thread, and, indeed, was running ads on the site as I posted in it.

Otherwise, what are you saying in your post? That this rule change is like going "fucking ballistic", and that new forumgoers who read page three of this rules thread will be upset at me implying I have better taste than others?

Migrant, you still have total freedom here so long as you're good and entertaining. I'll permit shitposting if I respect you. (Unfortunately I don't like you let alone respect you, so I guess life sucks for you..) It's also the case that the rules thread before was a little disingenuous - we still moderated and banned people for being shitty and annoying by our own subjective standards.

RickAstley, on 28 March 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

as said by the person using the shitty, never funny meme.

I do have to say I do agree with changes. While the freedom was something that brought me into the community, it has obviously shown that a loose approach just doesn't cut it with an fanbase that BCB draws in. I'll be definitely interested in where this place goes from here on in.

RickAstley, on 28 March 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

this post is funny, but not in the way you meant it to be

I was never really prone to change, I'm just one of those people who is reluctant to shift my lazy ass into a different way of doing things. The thing is, the only change I'm noticing (as a result of the new rules) is the odd paranoia some people are trying to spread. It doesn't seem like much has changed in terms of posting freedom and such; people were always judged by these rules, and now that they are written out in plane words people won't be as surprised anymore when they get "mistreated" or whatever would happen. I see these rules as more of a insurance for Suitcase, and I hope that that is how it is intended, because then nothing has changed.

On a different note, I will miss recess, and the people who left with it. Some topics in there were not worth throwing out, but as a result of establishing the rules more strictly they had to be left out to avoid going on the slipper slope to Recess crap piles. One of them would be the music rating thing. It had some good posts, I found plenty of interesting new music in there, and occasionally there would actually be some good feedback as to why people did/ didn't like a song. The aspect that I liked about it was essentially the 'organized randomness.' People would have to try to actually try to mess it up, all they had to do was contribute some music and give a rating. But as the rules state, having a 'free for all' thread on a non comic related topic has to potential to create a sub forum, and that was what the deletion of Recess was trying to avoid. Personally I was satisfied with the 'crap' being contained in the Recess section, but it looks like it got out of hand, or people lost their patience for it. Either way I'll miss the gems that stuck out of the mud, and hopefully once things cool over with the new rules there could be an attempt to loosen the leash on the creation/ resurrection of certain topics.

This post has been edited by The Swimmer: 28 March 2012 - 08:23 PM

whf, on 28 March 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

As long as it's funny then I've done my job.

After reading though this, the only thing that comes to mind is V for Vendetta for me...

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Wither this just simply be that I no long have my home and have to find how to work in Social Study's (Which in truth to whole dose make me uneasy due to the fact that force had to be used for "control") or just that all I can think of is CCCP.


Quite a different change in actions from once before; may it be for the good and this not some bad be a thought looked back upon in shame.

Cheers to the new beginning.

iRussisch, on 28 March 2012 - 09:58 PM, said:

what the fuck am i reading

whf, on 28 March 2012 - 10:23 PM, said:

Dare I say WHF got trolled?

After looking at the post count and location. Nope. Oh well, it could have been a 10/10.

Pants, on 28 March 2012 - 11:40 PM, said:

that post amused me because it was incoherent and riddled with grammatical errors
if anything your post misusing trolling "trolled" me a lot more than that one

I do not remember telling anyone I was king of the English language; you come to far to find me for that.

I am siding with you, Is it game to point down at friends here in Social Study's?

iRussisch, on 29 March 2012 - 01:59 AM, said:

Welcome!

iRussisch, on 28 March 2012 - 09:58 PM, said:

See that only really works as governments exist in physical buildings in physical places that people can physically go to and fuck shit up. A forum like this has no physical existence. It is data on a server and with the flick of a switch it can be turned off. This forum is not a right, it is a privilege. It can be removed with ease if the choice was decided, unlike things on the physical plane of existence.

TLDR, "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people." doesn't really apply here. I mean, respect between both levels should be there and is the goal but that works two ways. Without the rules there was no respect, only people with a sense of self-entitlement.

@Ruk

I was under the impression oppression was not a physical object.

iRussisch, on 29 March 2012 - 01:59 AM, said:

Guys are not the best at seeing a troll, are you?

oh he was just trolling, he totally got you guys, gg

edit- wacko sort of explained irussischs shit to me, i guess it was a misunderstanding and i dont care much so yeah. he not banned

So pretty much even after reading the rules. One fuck up or what a moderator views as a fuck up and its an instant ban? Seems like to be a little fair is to at least send a PM with that one warning. Send a PM to tell em to knock it off? I'm sure a lot of people might acttually get banned cause of being blinded by emotions and atttempt to vent it out on the forums. I guess like a 3 strike system? Warning - temp ban - perma ban

You sure didn't read the replies in the thread did you

The rules might take some time to get used to, but otherwise I think I will be good on the forum.

Taeshi, on 29 March 2012 - 11:21 AM, said:

Nope~ Lazy as hell!

Harsh but fair?

Upon reading this topic, I find myself thinking less and less about George Orwell, the Iron Curtain, North Korea or Yugoslavian government and instead being more and more reminded of earlier forum strife. ^_^

There is quite a bit of precedence here; nothing quite surprises me about the contents. Carry on, people - we are all just who we are, and nothing in either direction from that.

I must admit, though, that I was surprised how I remained a moderator for so long even after I had, technically, departed (despite my visits every time the Earth's grey satellite decides to don its azure cloak). Still, it is true that there was little to no control until this point, barring some minor actions, so I suppose the increase was a good a time as any. The expression does bring some things to mind, but the impression is one that cannot help but leave me with a chuckle. So I will repeat; carry on. ^_^

ILB, on 30 March 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

A+ ILB, you hit the nail right on the head.