Fin Fang Foom Muses On The New Rules

Fin Fang Foom · June 6, 2005

Well, here we are, all back in our little cyber-sandbox. Each wih his own favorite scoop and pail. Some of you were naughty boys and caused Daddy to kick us all out of our play area for a time of reflection. But Daddy has reopened the playground and we're now all free to frolick and make merry - or for many of you, mary. WAIT! Uh oh, I may have just said something that "disparages others". I'd better be careful as I now share with my playmates a few thoughts on the "new" rules.

First off, I completely believe that Daddy's heart is in the right place and he's trying to what he thinks is right. In other words, he's trying to do the impossible.

The second sentence of TMCR is completely telling: "...and the kinds of common decency that govern human interaction worldwide." Daddy, you know I love you but it's it time to take off the rose-colored glasses? When you say "worldwide", are you including the Darfur region of the Sudan, North Korea, Syria, Iran, Cuba, Red China, etc.? You have a slightly utopian view of the world. Every country on the planet has a military because of what governs interaction worldwide. Soldiers have guns, not lollipops.

I know this is going to sound incendiary and, for a change, I honestly don't mean it that way but the new rules have an aroma of fascism. We the state know what's best for everyone and what everyone should say and we're going to prohibit anything we think doesn't fit into our utopian view of the world.

It's your site and you're free to run it anyway you wish, granted, However, you're trying to rewrite the rules for a Message Board and that's like trying to get toothpaste back in the tube. It's not only difficult but ultimately impossible.

I know the ladies can get a little rambunctious at times (while I maintain my standing as the paradigm of good taste and manners) but that's part of what makes it interesting. Are there cranks on the board like Donnie? Sure. Big deal. If the worst thing in life is scrolling past one of Donnie's childish rants, I would say life is an utter success.

After you dumped the sand out of our sandbox, you mentioned that you had gotten two emails (gasp!) from guys saying that they weren't comfortable with posting here because someone might be mean to them. Please, let me speak for pretty much everyone here when I say: boo-fucking-hoo. If they're scared about asking a question on a message board for prostitutes, they've got bigger problems then a few strangers possibly being "mean" to them. Where do they think they are? A message board for Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral?

http://www.crystalcathedral.org

What causes the cranks to post is that people RESPOND to them. If we pretend they don't exist, they grab their scoop and pail and go elsewhere. If a post is out of control, do what I do: DON'T READ IT. The TV is filled with things I don't want to watch and I click right past them.

The biggest problem with this board is that too many of you take it and yourselves waaaaaaaaaaaaay too seriously. I've said time and time again that the guys who hate me "don't get the joke." The same thing goes for this board. The main reason for this board is to talk about prostitutes. HELLO!?!? If you're looking for civility, I again refer you to the link above.

A couple of years ago, I left this board not because people were being "mean" to me but rather because HooBoy (may he rest in peace) and his minions "didn't get the joke" and made it his mission to find out who I was and expose me - a clear violation of the Message Board rules - DOUBLE GASP! Things got a litte too creepy for my taste and I went away for a time. I came back and since then I haven't been any moderator's chew toy. So far.

My prediction is that things will be different for a time but slowly the vitriol will start seeping through the cracks and before you know it things will be right back to where they were before - an anonymous bunch of nasty bitches ripping each other to shreds.

And won't that be heaven?

Blissfully yours,

FFF

Fin Fang Foom · June 6, 2005

Well, here we are, all back in our little cyber-sandbox. Each wih his own favorite scoop and pail. Some of you were naughty boys and caused Daddy to kick us all out of our play area for a time of reflection. But Daddy has reopened the playground and we're now all free to frolick and make merry - or for many of you, mary. WAIT! Uh oh, I may have just said something that "disparages others". I'd better be careful as I now share with my playmates a few thoughts on the "new" rules.

First off, I completely believe that Daddy's heart is in the right place and he's trying to what he thinks is right. In other words, he's trying to do the impossible.

The second sentence of TMCR is completely telling: "...and the kinds of common decency that govern human interaction worldwide." Daddy, you know I love you but it's it time to take off the rose-colored glasses? When you say "worldwide", are you including the Darfur region of the Sudan, North Korea, Syria, Iran, Cuba, Red China, etc.? You have a slightly utopian view of the world. Every country on the planet has a military because of what governs interaction worldwide. Soldiers have guns, not lollipops.

I know this is going to sound incendiary and, for a change, I honestly don't mean it that way but the new rules have an aroma of fascism. We the state know what's best for everyone and what everyone should say and we're going to prohibit anything we think doesn't fit into our utopian view of the world.

It's your site and you're free to run it anyway you wish, granted, However, you're trying to rewrite the rules for a Message Board and that's like trying to get toothpaste back in the tube. It's not only difficult but ultimately impossible.

I know the ladies can get a little rambunctious at times (while I maintain my standing as the paradigm of good taste and manners) but that's part of what makes it interesting. Are there cranks on the board like Donnie? Sure. Big deal. If the worst thing in life is scrolling past one of Donnie's childish rants, I would say life is an utter success.

After you dumped the sand out of our sandbox, you mentioned that you had gotten two emails (gasp!) from guys saying that they weren't comfortable with posting here because someone might be mean to them. Please, let me speak for pretty much everyone here when I say: boo-fucking-hoo. If they're scared about asking a question on a message board for prostitutes, they've got bigger problems then a few strangers possibly being "mean" to them. Where do they think they are? A message board for Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral?

http://www.crystalcathedral.org

What causes the cranks to post is that people RESPOND to them. If we pretend they don't exist, they grab their scoop and pail and go elsewhere. If a post is out of control, do what I do: DON'T READ IT. The TV is filled with things I don't want to watch and I click right past them.

The biggest problem with this board is that too many of you take it and yourselves waaaaaaaaaaaaay too seriously. I've said time and time again that the guys who hate me "don't get the joke." The same thing goes for this board. The main reason for this board is to talk about prostitutes. HELLO!?!? If you're looking for civility, I again refer you to the link above.

A couple of years ago, I left this board not because people were being "mean" to me but rather because HooBoy (may he rest in peace) and his minions "didn't get the joke" and made it his mission to find out who I was and expose me - a clear violation of the Message Board rules - DOUBLE GASP! Things got a litte too creepy for my taste and I went away for a time. I came back and since then I haven't been any moderator's chew toy. So far.

My prediction is that things will be different for a time but slowly the vitriol will start seeping through the cracks and before you know it things will be right back to where they were before - an anonymous bunch of nasty bitches ripping each other to shreds.

And won't that be heaven?

Blissfully yours,

FFF

June 6, 2005

Interesting read FF, as it often is when you undertake serious discussion, which is not often enough. I embrace about half of what you put forward. I don't think which half would suprise anyone that's been around awhile.

My initial reaction to the New Rules is summed up by my view that they seem reasonable for an adult website where the adults act responsibly and respectfully. I see no high hurdles to be scaled or deep trenches to be crossed. There is plenty of latitude to have legitimate discussion about serious issues or frivilous discussions about fluff. The rules seem carefully written with enough specificity to give example, yet amorphous enough to not sanction implicitly any unenumerated behavior.

Upon the initial read only two asepcts of the rules jump out at me for comment. The first is the four-time-loser rule regarding suspensions and banishment. I think the management is going a long extra mile to tolerate the chronically disrespectful. Civil jurisdictions, when drawing a line, usually draw it with three time loosers. (Several Asian states adopt the one-time-big-looser rule when it comes to drugs. Maybe that is a little extreme. )

I think this speaks to management reluctance for the 'nuclear option'. I appreciate the sentiment. I also think that after three times, the fourth is a forgone conclusion. That is unless the offender simply views these chances as get-out-of-jail-free cards, or at little cost anyway, that can be played until the stakes become really BIG. Ultimately, this serves to bestow license to hard-core cases that don't really care much or at all about rules or to others with a constitution incapable of possessing self control in anonymous or semi-anonymous forums.

The second aspect of the New Rules that jumps out at me is the 'zero tolerance policy' that allows forgiveness for the first posting of pedophiliac material. Guess I'm confused about zero tolerance. I assume we are talking blatant 'child pornography'. I am. One warning seems overly generous.

In ambiguous circumstances where information or pics of someone honestly mistaken to be of legal are posted, the one warning rule doesn't seem out of place.

Regarding the potential for slipping back to the old ways, yes there is that. As you point out much of the world is uncivilized and some of the rest acts in an uncivilized manner sometimes. Civility is not a natural state. Yet it has succeeded when people come together for common purpose. It does not obey the Law of Inertia, in that once in motion it does not tend to stay in motion. It has to be continually worked at by its constituents through daily practice and by enforcement of 'rules of consensus' through institutions set up by consensus. Of course that is the 'public world'. The private world works on a consensus of one (CEO) or a few (Board of Directors) . When the private world attempts to reflect the consensus of the public sector I think that is a good thing, at least in this instance. BTW, public sector should not be interpreted as limited to the governental sector. Examples of the public sector include: The Ladies Garden Club, Little League, Jewish Community Center, The New York Times Op Ed Page...

June 6, 2005

Interesting read FF, as it often is when you undertake serious discussion, which is not often enough. I embrace about half of what you put forward. I don't think which half would suprise anyone that's been around awhile.

My initial reaction to the New Rules is summed up by my view that they seem reasonable for an adult website where the adults act responsibly and respectfully. I see no high hurdles to be scaled or deep trenches to be crossed. There is plenty of latitude to have legitimate discussion about serious issues or frivilous discussions about fluff. The rules seem carefully written with enough specificity to give example, yet amorphous enough to not sanction implicitly any unenumerated behavior.

Upon the initial read only two asepcts of the rules jump out at me for comment. The first is the four-time-loser rule regarding suspensions and banishment. I think the management is going a long extra mile to tolerate the chronically disrespectful. Civil jurisdictions, when drawing a line, usually draw it with three time loosers. (Several Asian states adopt the one-time-big-looser rule when it comes to drugs. Maybe that is a little extreme. )

I think this speaks to management reluctance for the 'nuclear option'. I appreciate the sentiment. I also think that after three times, the fourth is a forgone conclusion. That is unless the offender simply views these chances as get-out-of-jail-free cards, or at little cost anyway, that can be played until the stakes become really BIG. Ultimately, this serves to bestow license to hard-core cases that don't really care much or at all about rules or to others with a constitution incapable of possessing self control in anonymous or semi-anonymous forums.

The second aspect of the New Rules that jumps out at me is the 'zero tolerance policy' that allows forgiveness for the first posting of pedophiliac material. Guess I'm confused about zero tolerance. I assume we are talking blatant 'child pornography'. I am. One warning seems overly generous.

In ambiguous circumstances where information or pics of someone honestly mistaken to be of legal are posted, the one warning rule doesn't seem out of place.

Regarding the potential for slipping back to the old ways, yes there is that. As you point out much of the world is uncivilized and some of the rest acts in an uncivilized manner sometimes. Civility is not a natural state. Yet it has succeeded when people come together for common purpose. It does not obey the Law of Inertia, in that once in motion it does not tend to stay in motion. It has to be continually worked at by its constituents through daily practice and by enforcement of 'rules of consensus' through institutions set up by consensus. Of course that is the 'public world'. The private world works on a consensus of one (CEO) or a few (Board of Directors) . When the private world attempts to reflect the consensus of the public sector I think that is a good thing, at least in this instance. BTW, public sector should not be interpreted as limited to the governental sector. Examples of the public sector include: The Ladies Garden Club, Little League, Jewish Community Center, The New York Times Op Ed Page...

woodlawn · June 6, 2005

> Ultimately,

>this serves to bestow license to hard-core cases that don't

>really care much or at all about rules or to others with a

>constitution incapable of possessing self control

>Civility is not a natural state. Yet it has

>succeeded when people come together for common purpose. It

>does not obey the Law of Inertia, in that once in motion it

>does not tend to stay in motion. It has to be continually

>worked at by its constituents through daily practice and by

>enforcement of 'rules of consensus' through institutions set

>up by consensus.

I agree completely. I always get a kick out of your posts on how important it is for everyone to obey a common set of rules. I get a kick out of them because every single one of them is posted on a message board maintained for the benefit of people who buy or sell the services of prostitutes. You know how I love irony!

woodlawn · June 6, 2005

> Ultimately,

>this serves to bestow license to hard-core cases that don't

>really care much or at all about rules or to others with a

>constitution incapable of possessing self control

>Civility is not a natural state. Yet it has

>succeeded when people come together for common purpose. It

>does not obey the Law of Inertia, in that once in motion it

>does not tend to stay in motion. It has to be continually

>worked at by its constituents through daily practice and by

>enforcement of 'rules of consensus' through institutions set

>up by consensus.

I agree completely. I always get a kick out of your posts on how important it is for everyone to obey a common set of rules. I get a kick out of them because every single one of them is posted on a message board maintained for the benefit of people who buy or sell the services of prostitutes. You know how I love irony!

June 6, 2005

Yeah, irony can ba a hoot. Also it is ironic that with our differing view points regarding rules issues, we can actually agree to the same set of rules that permit entrance to these forums.

June 6, 2005

Yeah, irony can ba a hoot. Also it is ironic that with our differing view points regarding rules issues, we can actually agree to the same set of rules that permit entrance to these forums.

duke37 · June 6, 2005

The main reason

>for this board is to talk about prostitutes. HELLO!?!? If

>you're looking for civility, I again refer you to the link

>above.

Really? Why? What is it about escorting or prostitution (for that matter) makes the subject of it incompatible with an expectation to civil discussion.? I disagree. If there is one thing the whole Hooboy site is based on is that hiring an escort can be an ordinary and with some improvements a reliable experience. If it weren't subject to improvement reviews wouldn't make much difference. I think actual experience has shown they DO make a difference. We have had this discussion before but for me there is nothing immoral about prostitutes just unpopular. While I think I could talk about immoral things without getting nasty, unpopular things should be no problem. So again why? Why should it be impossible to be civil?

>My prediction is that things will be different for a time but

>slowly the vitriol will start seeping through the cracks and

>before you know it things will be right back to where they

>were before - an anonymous bunch of nasty bitches ripping each

>other to shreds.

>

>And won't that be heaven?

Not for me, sorry. I hope you're wrong. I know some people prefer that but aren't there sites that cater to that desire already out there?

Jeff

duke37 · June 6, 2005

The main reason

>for this board is to talk about prostitutes. HELLO!?!? If

>you're looking for civility, I again refer you to the link

>above.

Really? Why? What is it about escorting or prostitution (for that matter) makes the subject of it incompatible with an expectation to civil discussion.? I disagree. If there is one thing the whole Hooboy site is based on is that hiring an escort can be an ordinary and with some improvements a reliable experience. If it weren't subject to improvement reviews wouldn't make much difference. I think actual experience has shown they DO make a difference. We have had this discussion before but for me there is nothing immoral about prostitutes just unpopular. While I think I could talk about immoral things without getting nasty, unpopular things should be no problem. So again why? Why should it be impossible to be civil?

>My prediction is that things will be different for a time but

>slowly the vitriol will start seeping through the cracks and

>before you know it things will be right back to where they

>were before - an anonymous bunch of nasty bitches ripping each

>other to shreds.

>

>And won't that be heaven?

Not for me, sorry. I hope you're wrong. I know some people prefer that but aren't there sites that cater to that desire already out there?

Jeff

June 6, 2005

>Not for me, sorry. I hope you're wrong. I know some people

>prefer that but aren't there sites that cater to that desire

>already out there?

Actually yes there is, however if you're looking for people being ripped apart into pieces, you'll probably be disappointed, but then again maybe not! It's simply a site where the only rule is no private information can be disclosed on the site. Otherwise, it's a community where healthy dialogue between adults who choose to be treated like adults can interact with one another. Oh yeah and the eye candy ain't bad either.

http://p101.ezboard.com/brevoltrevolt20873

:9

June 6, 2005

>Not for me, sorry. I hope you're wrong. I know some people

>prefer that but aren't there sites that cater to that desire

>already out there?

Actually yes there is, however if you're looking for people being ripped apart into pieces, you'll probably be disappointed, but then again maybe not! It's simply a site where the only rule is no private information can be disclosed on the site. Otherwise, it's a community where healthy dialogue between adults who choose to be treated like adults can interact with one another. Oh yeah and the eye candy ain't bad either.

http://p101.ezboard.com/brevoltrevolt20873

:9

woodlawn · June 6, 2005

>Also it is ironic that with our

>differing view points regarding rules issues, we can actually

>agree to the same set of rules that permit entrance to these

>forums.

No, nothing ironic about that.

But does it not strike you as ironic that you disparage "hard cases" who have a chronic problem respecting rules, when the truth is that if you had been convicted of every criminal offense you have actually committed you would have been eligible for a Repeat Offender program years ago? Sure seems ironic to me.

woodlawn · June 6, 2005

>Also it is ironic that with our

>differing view points regarding rules issues, we can actually

>agree to the same set of rules that permit entrance to these

>forums.

No, nothing ironic about that.

But does it not strike you as ironic that you disparage "hard cases" who have a chronic problem respecting rules, when the truth is that if you had been convicted of every criminal offense you have actually committed you would have been eligible for a Repeat Offender program years ago? Sure seems ironic to me.

noviceny · June 6, 2005

what new rules ?? I just scrolled down without reading them and clicked

"agree" :-) :-) :-)

Just kidding Daddy...I read them all just like I was taught for the SAT's "Read all the directions even if you think ya know what they say"

BTW met a fellow board member in Montreal, and I told him that I really cant remember what most people write anyway. Is it the same with most of you ? I get a sense of style with woodlawn and FFF, but fuck all if I can remember the rest of you :-) :-)

Oh yeah, rick and BN I remember there style too

noviceny · June 6, 2005

what new rules ?? I just scrolled down without reading them and clicked

"agree" :-) :-) :-)

Just kidding Daddy...I read them all just like I was taught for the SAT's "Read all the directions even if you think ya know what they say"

BTW met a fellow board member in Montreal, and I told him that I really cant remember what most people write anyway. Is it the same with most of you ? I get a sense of style with woodlawn and FFF, but fuck all if I can remember the rest of you :-) :-)

Oh yeah, rick and BN I remember there style too

June 6, 2005

> but then again maybe not! It's simply a site

>where the only rule is no private information can be disclosed

>on the site. Otherwise, it's a community where healthy

>dialogue between adults who choose to be treated like adults

>can interact with one another. Oh yeah and the eye candy ain't

>bad either.

>

>http://p101.ezboard.com/brevoltrevolt20873

>

>:9

LOL... Thanks I needed that. I don''t think that description could be adequately defended even now. I know it couldn't be defended before the bodies were swept out to sea by the hackers that decimated ezboard. Not with a straight face anyway, except maybe by the sightless. Nevertheless, I hope it succeeds.

June 6, 2005

> but then again maybe not! It's simply a site

>where the only rule is no private information can be disclosed

>on the site. Otherwise, it's a community where healthy

>dialogue between adults who choose to be treated like adults

>can interact with one another. Oh yeah and the eye candy ain't

>bad either.

>

>http://p101.ezboard.com/brevoltrevolt20873

>

>:9

LOL... Thanks I needed that. I don''t think that description could be adequately defended even now. I know it couldn't be defended before the bodies were swept out to sea by the hackers that decimated ezboard. Not with a straight face anyway, except maybe by the sightless. Nevertheless, I hope it succeeds.

Guy Fawkes · June 6, 2005

While it would be fun to continue the “Sandbox” metaphor, it really doesn’t serve as a good example. A much better metaphor would be a theater.

Large groups of people often get together to go see a movie. You get your ticket, your popcorn, sit down, and wait for the lights to dim and the movie to begin. There is an expectation from the majority of the people there that they should be able to enjoy the movie. The theater benefits from that expectation.

So what do you do with the person whose cell phone rings? Is their right to talk on the phone greater than the rights of the people that would rather watch the movie? No, they’re asked to turn their cell phone off. If they persist they are asked to take the call somewhere else.

If somebody stands up and yells “Fire!” is that allowed? Not if the safety of the customers or of the business would be at risk as a result.

If you disagree with the rules, then I firmly believe that you should “Vote with your pocket book”. Go down the street to the theater that you like. If that establishment doesn’t exist, then go create it. If there are enough people that agree with you; you too will have a successful enterprise.

There are no perfect set of rules. If there was they would have been codified a long time ago and everybody would have a copy in their back pocket.

The owners of the Theater put a lot of time, money, and effort to create it. They have the right to pick the movies that’ll be played, the have the right to determine what the rules and policies will be. They are also allowed to put up the sign that says: “We reserve the right to refuse service to anybody”.

Am I wearing rose colored glasses? Yes, but more and more I have to agree with the T-Shirt that I saw not too long ago: “Losing my faith in humanity, one person at a time”. I’ve been losing that faith, but thank heavens there’s a lot of humanity. It’ll take a long time before I give up on everybody.

Thank-you FFF, Your points were well made, and I heard them. As usual, there are several areas where I disagree. But boy it sure is fun hearing someone be able to put them out in a reasonable manner.

Regards, Daddy

Guy Fawkes · June 6, 2005