Supposedly

I never go into POG, but the answer to your drama here is that since you are the werewolf forum have the Miss POG winner be the woman with the hairiest tittays. You're welcome.

indeed, "These Nazi Mods Have Got To Go" is a game as old as time itself

as is "Typo Nit"

The existence of Ms POG effects me=wrong. Affect is right.
I am trying to effect change for the betterment of my people=right. Affect would be wrong.

At least I think this is the case.

Mat

nah, he's derp clear

stick with the original plan

Monkey

gtpitch wolfy disappearance from POG

Fair enough, thanks.

LDO.

As I don't go into POG, I guess I had a wrong impression as to what Ms. Pog was. I thought it was a voting contest.

I guess we need a TWBS so Boat has an area where Boat can be Boat and safe from the rude people infecting the rest of the forum.

Mat/Bobo, just give me POG 7.0 and I'll fly you up the Alexa ladder.

Thank you for weighing in, OG poggers. WN, I still haven't got my homework.

She said, while calmly stroking the hair of the white knight lackeys that sit on the ground below her.

I have homework? I hope I get to be a white knight lackey because it's sort of an amusing thought given The History of POG

You were the one person I did hope would take their turn edumacating us vile sexists in the thread.
Rule#1 is that you have to have an avatar that objectifies women. Sorry bro.

Sometimes I feel I'm missing something when not visiting POG. Now you are taking care of that ATF will not be on the forum merging/closing list!

If you want my advice, it's to pay attention to and think about perspectives like this:

I think it's hard to write a short-enough-to-be-readable explanation for why beauty contests are problematic in relationship to the tendency to evaluate women primarily as sex objects while still allowing room for the expression of sexuality. I think it's hard for several reasons

1) It's hard to talk about with men specifically because we don't directly experience it in the same way. People tend to be skeptical of experiences they don't share. This is one reason why I also think it's good to hear about this from actual women, not from me.

2) It's hard because it involves thinking about cognitive, emotional, and behavioral tendencies that are deeply embedded in culture. Even women struggle with this aspect of things, for example this article from the current Gender and Society relates how basically all of the women they interviewed (professors) could relate stories in which they experienced sexism (while, re: (1) none of the men reported similar experiences), but the women tended to conceptualize these experiences as singular episodes, rather than as representative of a general problem. This also complicates things by making it fairly easy for people who are disposed against taking complaints about sexism seriously to dismiss those complaints by pointing out (for example) that women also participate in things like Ms. POG. Yet, both TL and crossnerd touched upon some of the complexities relating to that participation.

3) In relation to both of the above points, a lot of men tend to experience discussions about sexism as an attack on their character, or as you put it an attempt to educate "vile sexists". The defensiveness is an impediment to a productive conversation, but I also think the tendency to think of a complaint about something like Ms. POG as an accusation of "vile sexism" against individuals misses most of the larger questions.

4) Like I said, it's also difficult to make clear distinctions between unobjectionable expressions of sexuality and "objectification". I think that's largely related to (2). I don't think that means we should give up on drawing distinctions, but it again makes it pretty easy for the so-inclined to straw-man concern about objectification as being an unrealistic attempt to suppress "normal" human sexuality.

Anyway, I don't know all the answers but I think paying attention to what women tell you about their experiences and thinking about those kinds of issues is a good place to start.

I wouldn't sweat it. They keep bringing up bans and infractions for me as if I've had any in the last 3 years. Such magnets, Hifi! I wonder if they know mods can see our histories? Lol.

I think MonkeyB does a reasonable job moderating in some robust threads. I think the basis for the opposition to MOnkeyB moderation has more to do with objections to his politics rather than his rulings.


It ought be noted - that I would likely be lumped together with Monkey politically. Whilst, that might be true, the real reason I support MonkeyB as a moderator is the fact that he is willing to make rulings on posts that are difficult and might otherwise be ducked through to inertia or indifference. For example, KruZe and Gambit - both of whom I love playing games in the sub-forum with and have never had a problem with - tend to be very laisse-faire when interpreting infractions. Now, this might be ultimately what the owners want or not (I am not sure) but it seems to me that if you have rules at least some of the time they need to be actively enforced. Thus, MonekyB's style of moderation seems to counter-balance the others.

Thats my two cents worth.

I see an infraction in 2016 and in 2015

I didn't realize we were including 0 point warnings?

If that's a "magnet for bans and infractions", would you care to post the rest of the present posters' 2015 and 2016 histories to demonstrate? It should all just be 0, right?

How about just the people who made the accusation then. 0, right?

Larry is one of the smart ones who got out early, well played.

Yeah she told someone to kill themselves not too long ago, and it wasn't a joke.

But the thing is, LL, she runs games every once in a while (I think), so the psychotic slips like that are just the price we have to pay for her presence. Or something.

Anywho, I'd also like to apologize on behalf of POG for this thread turning into a soap opera.

And I would just like to circle back to the original point of the OP and reiterate that Monkey Banana is very, very bad at this modding business. Thanks!

That happened years ago, and I feel terribly about it. (It wasn't on 2+2 though, and you know that.)

But, if you want to talk about how awful this kind of behavior is with someone who did actually do it super recently and doesn't feel badly at all about it, I know who you could ask. Its all over the grapevine.

Maybe he wants to identify himself?

Or you could just drop these ridiculous character attacks.

No guesses?

Ok.

And how many infractions have you eaten in the last two years, domer? How many bans?

Girl, enough already. I've been cool this whole time, but its time to let it go.

personal attacks itt

Shirley something will be done about it

hahaha jk

You should go home too now, Becky. You have no moral high ground here.