Ask us more about the forums: READ THE OP or get BANNED. Yes, search is currently disabled for blue - General

most puns are from unfunny shitlords who are just trying to whore funny/zing/winner ratings.

My opinion on the banning-of-pun scenario on SH is that in serious, discussion promoting thread are O.K. to ban puns in if they get out of control. In humorous articles such as the "Man forced to moonwalk at gunpoint" thread, I find puns acceptable. To be honest it's far better than having people regurgitate the same opinion over and over [editline]27th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Kai-ryuu;35739349]most puns are from unfunny shitlords who are just trying to whore funny/zing/winner ratings.[/QUOTE] Plenty of people find them funny and honestly as long as the same pun is not regurgitated five times over, it doesn't get too much in the way of discussion.

[QUOTE=DesumThePanda;35739351] Plenty of people find them funny and honestly as long as the same pun is not regurgitated five times over, it doesn't get too much in the way of discussion.[/QUOTE] plenty of people are bad posters who need to be wiped out in a mass idiot cull

[QUOTE=ILY;35739317]Temporary bans looming over your head sounds like a good method of regulation to me[/QUOTE] I'm not sure you're understanding. By regulation I mean "a certain amount/density of puns in a thread before it's considered to be a problem". Most threads in SH have at most like three puns per page. There are exceptions to this (some have none, some like the one linked just hand out puns like they're candy). This is fine, because if we manage to get multiple pages on such a sparse crop of puns then the puns obviously aren't a problem. Now if the huge profusion of puns (like in the linked thread) is deemed to be a problem, then I can see the bans being handed out justifiably. I'd still respectfully disagree personally, but on the 40+ puns per page thing whether or not it's bad is all subjective.

[QUOTE=ILY;35739317]Temporary bans looming over your head sounds like a good method of regulation to me[/QUOTE] That's hardly regulation. That's outright prohibition. I understand the idea of the rule against puns. However, the thought that anyone making a joke or pun is going to get banned sounds like the moderators trying to be the "fun police". There are times and places for puns. There are news stories that exist solely as a joke to be made fun of(the moonwalking story is a perfect example). I can understand banning for stupid puns in a serious thread, especially when the pun is made without adding anything to the discussion. However, the simple act of making a joke about something shouldn't be bannable. Maybe the idea of moderating a pun by the ratings it gets? Dumb puns end up being banned and legitimately clever puns would stay up. Or you can just feel it out, banning people who make puns in threads that don't deserve a pun, or for making unclever unfunny puns.

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739396]I'm not sure you're understanding. By regulation I mean "a certain amount/density of puns in a thread before it's considered to be a problem". Most threads in SH have at most like three puns per page. There are exceptions to this (some have none, some like the one linked just hand out puns like they're candy). This is fine, because if we manage to get multiple pages on such a sparse crop of puns then the puns obviously aren't a problem. Now if the huge profusion of puns (like in the linked thread) is deemed to be a problem, then I can see the bans being handed out justifiably. I'd still respectfully disagree personally, but on the 40+ puns per page thing whether or not it's bad is all subjective.[/QUOTE] No, I understood you the first time. [QUOTE=yawmwen;35739406]That's hardly regulation. That's outright prohibition. [/QUOTE] Maybe next time I'll add a spoiler that says I was kidding since you people didn't notice

[QUOTE=Kai-ryuu;35739349]most puns are from unfunny shitlords who are just trying to whore funny/zing/winner ratings.[/QUOTE] Yea, ban those. Don't ban people when they make clever jokes.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35739425]Yea, ban those. Don't ban people when they make clever jokes.[/QUOTE] so mods should be morphed into pun judges?

[QUOTE=ILY;35739415]No, I understood you the first time. Maybe next time I'll add a spoiler that says I was kidding since you people didn't notice[/QUOTE] No such thing as tone of text. For things like that I prefer surrounding things like "it's a joke" in four pairs of [[b][/b]sub] tags - same effect but far less tacky looking in my opinion.

[QUOTE=Parakon;35739449]so mods should be morphed into pun judges?[/QUOTE] They seem to have the mental capacity to make judgements on other rules. They are able to use discretion with flaming, trolling, stupid threads, and shitposting. Why shouldn't they be able to use discretion with jokes as well?

[QUOTE=Parakon;35739449]so mods should be morphed into pun judges?[/QUOTE] I seem to remember them being similar to pun judges back in 08 back when being stupid was actually a bannable offense

My two cents: threads like [url=http://facepunch.com/threads/1178717]this[/url] should not have puns allowed, but if it's [url=http://facepunch.com/threads/1180169]a ridiculous story about a meth addict streaking through rush-hour traffic[/url] they ought to be fine.

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739459]No such thing as tone of text. For things like that I prefer surrounding things like "it's a joke" in four pairs of [[b][/b]sub] tags - same effect but far less tacky looking in my opinion.[/QUOTE] I suppose being fashionable while posting is important, eh? Nobody likes a tacky sentence

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739468] back when being stupid was actually a bannable offense[/QUOTE] in other words when these forums were good

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739285] how can they be cherry picked when I said the section as a whole was evidence[/QUOTE] You mentioned two scenarios, one where news threads would devolve into a flame war, or just die as there would be nothing to discuss, with no other possible outcome. There's a thread in this section with 5 pages and others with more than one I assume with the rule in effect so I don't see any logic to these points.

In all honesty I think the pun thing is way too strict. People wanna have a good laugh, the majority of the community doesn't care. What's the big deal? Since mods can't be expected to judge which puns are clever or not from their own opinions, just ban the ones where the box/clock rating is dominant.

If you haven't noticed we're getting rid of the shitty tasteless posts and the awful no-content joke replies in SH. I'm not going to bargain with you and allow some stupid 'threshold' of bad jokes per page that the mod team has to enforce, we're disallowing them entirely because it's awful.

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;35739493]In all honesty I think the pun thing is way too strict. People wanna have a good laugh, the majority of the community doesn't care. What's the big deal? Since mods can't be expected to judge which puns are clever or not from their own opinions, just ban the ones where the box/clock rating is dominant.[/QUOTE] a better solution would be to ban bad posts (puns included) and remove the ratings system and fast threads

[QUOTE=Sanius;35739500]a better solution would be too ban bad posts (puns included) and remove the ratings system and fast threads[/QUOTE] One step at a time

I'm going to go ahead and take postal's new post in that thread and reply here. [quote=postal]It's not impossible to have a discussion without news pun shit posts. It happens all the time, why you think you can convince me otherwise I have no idea.[/quote] We're not trying to convince you it's [b]impossible[/b]. We all have slightly different reasons we're against this rule (I say it's what keeps us from flaming each other every thread), but "impossible to post otherwise" is [b]NOT[/b] the primary issue.

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;35739493]In all honesty I think the pun thing is way too strict. People wanna have a good laugh, the majority of the community doesn't care. What's the big deal? Since mods can't be expected to judge which puns are clever or not from their own opinions, just ban the ones where the box/clock rating is dominant.[/QUOTE] if you want a good laugh go look in the mirror or something or go to LMAO pics.

[QUOTE=Kai-ryuu;35739525]if you want a good laugh go look in the mirror or something or go to LMAO pics.[/QUOTE] Why the hostility?

[QUOTE=ILY;35739474]I suppose being fashionable while posting is important, eh? Nobody likes a tacky sentence[/QUOTE] finally someone understands why i need all my posts to look [i]fabulous[/i] Really though, it just bugs me. I'm not one of those people that think they need to put a color and a fancy font styling on all their posts (because those make it far worse looking), but I also try to make them look kind of nice while I'm at it. It only bugs me when [b]I[/b] do it though, so that's why I haven't been trying to get everyone else to do it. [editline]27th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Kai-ryuu;35739525]if you want a good laugh go look in the mirror or something or go to LMAO pics.[/QUOTE] "laugh" and "LMAO pics" you can't be serious

[QUOTE=Dragon;35739499]If you haven't noticed we're getting rid of the shitty tasteless posts and the awful no-content joke replies in SH. I'm not going to bargain with you and allow some stupid 'threshold' of bad jokes per page that the mod team has to enforce, we're disallowing them entirely because it's awful.[/QUOTE] So what about the ones that aren't awful? You guys aren't being discriminatory. You are banning puns and jokes whether they are good or not. In fact the first post that was banned for being a pun wasn't even a pun in the first place. If you guys want to be fun police, then whatever. But in all honesty you can't keep up this charade of "we are getting rid of awful posts" when you are just making sure people can't make jokes anymore.

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739545]finally someone understands why i need all my posts to look [i]fabulous[/i] Really though, it just bugs me. I'm not one of those people that think they need to put a color and a fancy font styling on all their posts (because those make it far worse looking), but I also try to make them look kind of nice while I'm at it. It only bugs me when [b]I[/b] do it though, so that's why I haven't been trying to get everyone else to do it. [editline]27th April 2012[/editline] "laugh" and "LMAO pics" you can't be serious[/QUOTE] it's funny if you shutdown all thought processes and shit on your keyboard.

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739509]I'm going to go ahead and take postal's new post in that thread and reply here. We're not trying to convince you it's [b]impossible[/b]. We all have slightly different reasons we're against this rule (I say it's what keeps us from flaming each other every thread), but "impossible to post otherwise" is [b]NOT[/b] the primary issue.[/QUOTE] I don't see an issue with people flaming eachother if they can't have puns, as it usually gets them banned and if their flaming they're likely a tool/shit user. If they continue doing it, then they'll probably get perma'd as consecutive bans usually lead to that. So then we'd be down some shit users, which would be nice.

And people make much more awful posts than simple news puns in SH. Getting rid of jokes isn't even hitting the main problem.

[QUOTE=Sanius;35739500]ban bad posts[/quote] Just reinstate the smartness system and you'll purge most of the bad posting. Not a "problem solved" deal but it will make FP a hell of a lot better. [quote]remove the ratings system[/quote] The ratings system is to avoid all the "+1" and "I agree" and "lol" posts that would infest the place regardless of rules on them. It also provides feedback assuming the ratings can be interpreted without explanation in that post (and a lot of the time it can be) [quote][remove] fast threads[/QUOTE] see that would just mean the moderators have to spend all that extra time banning people for making those shit threads in GD or whatever. Garry made Fast Threads for a reason - while most to all of those threads should really be gone, it saves a lot of time to instead just clump them together in a shitpost central and leave them be. And time is money when you're moderating a forum the size of Facepunch.

I personally think the smartness system should come back, too. It was really effective from what I remember.

[QUOTE=lavacano;35739613]Just reinstate the smartness system and you'll purge most of the bad posting. Not a "problem solved" deal but it will make FP a hell of a lot better. The ratings system is to avoid all the "+1" and "I agree" and "lol" posts that would infest the place regardless of rules on them. It also provides feedback assuming the ratings can be interpreted without explanation in that post (and a lot of the time it can be) see that would just mean the moderators have to spend all that extra time banning people for making those shit threads in GD or whatever. Garry made Fast Threads for a reason - while most to all of those threads should really be gone, it saves a lot of time to instead just clump them together in a shitpost central and leave them be. And time is money when you're moderating a forum the size of Facepunch.[/QUOTE] so basically what you're suggesting is that the moderation team continues to pander to shitty posters while everybody wonders why these forums continue to suck harder every day you sure are an idea guy