You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
MySploofus
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message



Pages:  1    


smaug
Smaug  (Level: 141.2 - Posts: 2772)
Sun, 18th May '08 5:31 PM

GROUPS


Okay, an Editor griped in here we weren't using groups, I've put two in, no approval, no message, nothing.

Ok, "vile Sex Chatter" was marginal, but the other one at least deserved a response/reply.

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 5:36 PM

I put in for one and never got a reply as well.

maurlin
Maurlin  (Level: 213.5 - Posts: 2671)
Sun, 18th May '08 5:44 PM

I just checked for "rules" in Beta and this is the only thing I saw:
"Your suggested group will be activated within 24 hours if it is family friendly, and not too similar to an existing group".

I guess that if it has been over 24 hours (1) the suggested group wasn't family friendly, (2)it was too similar to an existing group, (3)no editor has been assigned to checking out and approving Groups, or (4) the powers that be don't give a **** about that aspect of Sploofus right now.

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 5:48 PM

I think the editors are too busy refusing to give people points back when they screw up a TQOTD, so no one gets ahead of them because they are players when they shouldn't be, to care about groups right now. That's my opinion.

Sploofus Editor
Sploofizz (Editor)  
Sun, 18th May '08 5:50 PM

There is an editor in charge of groups but since it isn't me I am not sure what the actual process is for accepting new groups, but I don't think you will get any specific notice, it will just show up on the list.

Have patience, and/or add to the 2.0 enhancement suggestions.

flcyclist
Flcyclist  (Level: 124.7 - Posts: 691)
Sun, 18th May '08 5:59 PM

It is my opinion (for whoever cares) that we should stop bashing editors. They do an awful lot of work for no pay and denying them the right to use the site as well would, it seems to me, take away their incentive to be an editor! Whoever complains, do YOU want to do all that work for no compensation???

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 6:12 PM

I would like to do all the work for no pay, if it helped me climb the leaderboards as it does in the case of our current editors. They like to argue that editing has no influence on their score or standings when it DOES. This game is won through wagering and showdowns, not the games themselves for the most part. All the editors have to do is deny your points back when they or the site screws up a wager to keep you from passing them on the leaderboard and they have won the game. Too much self-interest. If they want to be editors they shouldn't be players. It happened to me, it's happened to others, and it could happen to you. Games where the rules give one player an advantage they haven't earned spoil the game, and I think it should be a concern for anybody looking to have fun. Just my opinion. You're welcome to yours.

keithr81052
Keithr81052  (Level: 144.7 - Posts: 147)
Sun, 18th May '08 6:28 PM

tell me what you plan to do with all those precious points you seem to think is so important???????????

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 6:35 PM

What's important isn't the points in a game, it's the fairness that keeps the game fun. I know everyone doesn't have that attitude.....or else players wouldn't get kicked off for cheating. Even if we actually got lucky and the editors happen to be a decent bunch (how would I know since i don't know who they are) I think many people find cheating fun, even if only in a weak moment. Breaking the rules and not getting caught is fun, it's just kind of spoils the game for others is all.

keithr81052
Keithr81052  (Level: 144.7 - Posts: 147)
Sun, 18th May '08 7:08 PM

i agree with that, to me the points aren't important, I'll take them if I win them but the real enjoyment is the challenge of doing the quizzes and doing them without cheating

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 8:24 PM

A player PM'd me to tell me I sounded hostile when stating my opinion. I would like to apologize. It was not my intention. Still don't think editors should be players, but I do think they do a good job overall and I know for the most part they TRY to be fair.

tresgatos
Tresgatos  (Level: 205.1 - Posts: 4199)
Sun, 18th May '08 8:56 PM

I agree with Flcyclist. In fact, to say I'm tired of the editor-bashing that goes on around here would be an understatement.

Stoutyoungladd wrote: "Breaking the rules and not getting caught is fun." Maybe for you and some others, but not for everyone, so such a generalization is flawed. I can remember breaking the rules one time in second grade and not getting caught. I was so guilt-ridden about it that I told my mom. I'd much rather have a clean conscience and sleep well at night than do something like break Sploofus rules or any other rules I've agreed to abide by. I believe the editors feel the same.

-- Geri



smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 9:16 PM

Really Geri, I understand your sentiment. However, I feel that editor bashing can be an healty outlet for some of us. What kind of society would we live in if we didn't get to make fun of the president? For all I know, he's a great guy I would enjoy having a beer with. But he has power, I don't always agree with his decisions, and when he uses that power in ways that I don't agree with the only thing I can do with my frustration is to piss and moan and find reasons to make fun of him. I really think I am not so much making fun of the Person, since I obviously don't know the guy, but his decisions through making fun of him. Same with making fun of Arnold Schwarzenegger's accent. It wouldn't be funny if I did that to a co-worker with the same accent, for some reason Jay Leno and so forth can get away with it because he's a public figure. Maybe editors aren't celebrities.....but they are public figures as far as this site is concerned, and I think they should expect it from time to time, same as any other public figures do. It's nothing personal. They've used a sense of a humor from time to time that I have enjoyed, which shows me they are probably people I would like in real life. Some of us aren't really bashing them so much as the system, and they just happen to be the masked unidentified gatekeepers of that system. Unlike you Geri, I do and can get a "thrill" out of bad behavior, much like many people I know who are quite open about it. Maybe none of the editors have that, maybe all of them do, dunno, you'd have to ask them. I do support right to disagree with me however.

phitzy1
Phitzy1  (Level: 66.4 - Posts: 873)
Sun, 18th May '08 9:16 PM


My cat has fleas

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 18th May '08 9:53 PM

Stout - you said "...if it helped me climb the leaderboards as it does in the case of our current editors." If you don't know who is an editor, how can you know they're even ON the leaderboard, or anywhere near it?

Editors didn't apply for the job, didn't campaign, weren't voted on by the masses. They were invited (according to MANY other threads).

I'm guessing that if Justin saw anything like what you're talking about in one of his editors, he would disinvite that person.

Wild accusations without proof have WAY too much power in every arena in this country - we've been watching too many conspiracy movies (which is just about anything you watch any more).

This is real life - and the number of editors isn't that large. Yep - losing a lot of points stings. But how would your feelings change if you unchecked all that shows at the top of your screen and you didn't know about points? Would you quit playing? Would you play and be more content if it weren't a competition? What is the meaning of life? (It's a cereal - or IS it?)

If we're gonna be here, I just make a choice to believe in the best, rather than the worst of everybody. Except Smaug.

Could it be...no...surely not.....that you're jealous because if YOU were an editor, that would be your motive? Seriously, your accusation is a thought that has never even crossed my mind. Would it cross yours if it was merely the pleasure of playing rather than a number followed by zero(e)s? (Sorry - Dan Quayle moment).


smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 9:56 PM

Actually, I've asked the editors if I cancel my account and start over on points to change my username if they would let me back to into beta testing. Starting over at zero? Sound like I care about points? I do care about fairness. I do not believe believing the best about people is the best policy, I tried that with my ex-wife....biggest mistake EVER.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 18th May '08 10:28 PM

But you're not bitter!

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sun, 18th May '08 10:35 PM

Oh no, of course not!!

smaug
Smaug  (Level: 141.2 - Posts: 2772)
Sun, 18th May '08 11:07 PM

Outta my thread, Jeremy.

chickfbref1
Chickfbref1  (Level: 120.7 - Posts: 2012)
Sun, 18th May '08 11:16 PM

Ok, Jeremy, you can have my extra Bazillion points when I get them.

Here's what I think the dilemma is. I don't normally do WPs, when I got the opportunity to write one, I did. Then I really wanted to see who had done well, so I took my own WP, tanked it on purpose (ok I was in the top 50). While I'm sure this is a microcosm of what they go through, I really felt guilty about taking my own WP.

The moral dilemma is we want editors who care about this site, Justin can't pay them...so what is the alternative? I'm trusting him to recruit the most diplomatic people he can. Do they sometimes overstep....are they sometimes caustic? Yup, but I'm totally guilty of the same thing. If I ever get to be an editor, you would totally be able to tell, when I sent back your dumbass "Friends" quiz cause I had reviewed 2,000 of them earlier in the day and my response would be "Get a friggin life, stop writing quizzes that bore me to tears".

If they can't play and they're not paid, the only editor you are going to get is my 10 year old son and 6 year old daughter. YIKES

I think they love this site, just like the rest of us and they are human.

OOPS...used up my 2 cents...now I'm senseless

Me.

toledosugar
Toledosugar  (Level: 51.4 - Posts: 281)
Sun, 18th May '08 11:55 PM

Well said!

smokydevil
Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Mon, 19th May '08 12:02 AM

Well, it was fun playing the paranoid critic for awhile, but maybe you're right, maybe we wouldn't have editors if they didn't play because we have too many players who mooch by not paying fees. Still, in the best of worlds.....

rowlanda
Rowlanda  (Level: 70.0 - Posts: 2856)
Mon, 19th May '08 12:07 AM

Yes Chick....I agree
The Editors are people like you and I
who enjoy taking the puzzles and quizzes.
I sure as heck wouldn't be one if I then
couldn't play, as well as having to do all
that extra work....

smoke20
Smoke20  (Level: 62.6 - Posts: 2815)
Mon, 19th May '08 12:25 AM

What Chickie said.

smaug
Smaug  (Level: 141.2 - Posts: 2772)
Mon, 19th May '08 1:21 AM

More nudity.

rowlanda
Rowlanda  (Level: 70.0 - Posts: 2856)
Mon, 19th May '08 1:24 AM

I knew it!!!!
Smaug made a spelling error AGAIN
He wrote "GROUP" but he meant "GROPE"

tresgatos
Tresgatos  (Level: 205.1 - Posts: 4199)
Mon, 19th May '08 2:48 AM

I agree, excellent post by Chick.

Jeremy: We can agree to disagree. I don't know you that well yet except as a phenomenal WR and WM player whose times I aspire to also achieve one day, but you seem like a nice guy. You've taken the time to think about what everyone has said, and that speaks well of you. I hope that gives you as much of a thrill as being "bad."

BTW, I'm not some hardline, inflexible-thinking person. I believe there are times when certain rules or laws need to be broken in order to achieve things like justice, equality, progress.

Anyway, nice chatting with you.

-- Geri


townline
Townline  (Level: 54.0 - Posts: 213)
Mon, 19th May '08 9:31 AM

I assume that means Smaug will not be creating an alternative BBS for people that want uncensored messages.

Sploofus Editor
Sploofizz (Editor)  
Mon, 19th May '08 9:41 AM

As a player, I have no sympathy at all for anyone who loses a wager bigger than my total points!

As an editor I am not only insulted but hurt to my very heart that anyone would even think an editor made a decision based on holding back a player to improve their own standing on the leaderboard. First of all such a thing would never have occurred to me. And secondly, Stoutyounglad, no less than seven editors have been in on the discussion of your problem. There is no conspiracy here to hold you back.

Personally, my problem with reissuing you the points lost and wager token (and level points) is that there could be dozens of other people who got that question on a wager, and got it wrong, who just went on with their lives. In order to be fair (which I believe is one of your arguments - that everyone should be treated fairly), how can we give you back points without searching out anyone else who ever got that question wrong and recompensing them in some way?

Papermanbill thinks Snooker should not be considered a sport. After much discussion, the decision was made that the Sports category could and should represent many varied types of sports, games and competitions, so the Snooker questions can stay (not that we could change them at this time anyway), and no compensation would be given on that basis.

The editors are still discussing the ___-mancy issue.

donden
Donden  (Level: 112.5 - Posts: 2127)
Mon, 19th May '08 9:42 AM

Happy now, Townline?

eesusbejesus
Eesusbejesus  (Level: 75.0 - Posts: 3645)
Mon, 19th May '08 10:01 AM

I think the fairness issue is that he complained. In the real world, if someone assaults you, and you file a complaint, the legal system doesn't discuss holding off compensating you until they find all the other people who may have been assaulted by the individual, and equally compensate them. It is up to the individual to bring forth the problem.

I had my points & wager token restored because of a problem with the drop down boxes in sploofus beta. There was no issue of restoring any other people who may have had the same issue but didn't report it. I also was given back a question when I submitted a particularly crappy question that was about a paragraph in length. The editor who responded to my support ticket didn't even hesitate. Said "Yup, that's a horrid question, here's a new one." There was no mention of all of the other poor souls who may have ended up with the same one.

I don't think you can go back retroactively - each person here is responsible for taking action when they feel they've been wronged. We all have the same avenue to do so. If others choose not to,well, that's their decision. But that doesn't mean you can't right a wrong for a person who did complain and fix the problem for future occurrences.

lisap369
Lisap369  (Level: 61.1 - Posts: 992)
Mon, 19th May '08 10:32 AM

Eh.. give him back his points, Lodi states a good case

chyenn
Chyenn  (Level: 203.0 - Posts: 1332)
Mon, 19th May '08 10:34 AM


Sploofizz says:
""Personally, my problem with reissuing you the points lost and wager token (and level points) is that there could be dozens of other people who got that question on a wager, and got it wrong, who just went on with their lives. In order to be fair (which I believe is one of your arguments - that everyone should be treated fairly), how can we give you back points without searching out anyone else who ever got that question wrong and recompensing them in some way?""

Sploofizz, i appreciate your idea of fairness; and tracking down every person who received a particular TQOTD would be a nightmare. i don't think any effort should be made toward that end...

BUT...

Obviously you think the question is flawed as Stout contends. The problem lies is what to do about his lost points and wager token.

I think the fair thing would be to make it a policy that any recompense will only be considered if a member disputes something within a specified time limit, say within 10 days, of the incident. Many businesses have that kind of refund policy and it works well. With a specific window of opportunity to complain you won't feel obligated to search out any others who might have had the same issue but remained silent. Members then know their issues will be addressed individually and won't be judged by what might have happened to others.

salzypat
Salzypat  (Level: 156.5 - Posts: 5316)
Mon, 19th May '08 10:51 AM

Wise response, Chyenn, but I would limit it to a response within 24 hours. If you have a problem you most likely would respond immediately.

I also agree with Geri and Jank0614 -- the editor bashing is not necessary on the chat. If you have a real beef, write a support ticket.



rowlanda
Rowlanda  (Level: 70.0 - Posts: 2856)
Mon, 19th May '08 12:38 PM

Yes....
Editors are anonymous
and I like to know
who I am bashing

phitzy1
Phitzy1  (Level: 66.4 - Posts: 873)
Mon, 19th May '08 12:41 PM


still waiting for the grope group...

group grope?

alas


Pages:  1    



Copyright © 2003-2016 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus