I want to hear your opinions about were we should stop editing or not...as Doureios suggested...about using to "official" language etc etc.
We have our rules...
But i want to know the differntses between the ethic and aisthetic of each other...
For excamble...

...someone writes...Lord i think you made just a stupid comment...
or you behave like a idiot...
For me personall...such a coment would be sick...(especially if i didnt used any similar lang in a topic...)
Another point is...
some of you want or feel...that they cant say tere true feelings...
This is wrong...
nobody said the opposite...
we only want exchanges of inormations and opinions...in a respected way...without slight remarks...especially in hot issues...


some thoughts Gents...

Regards

Hey Lord, hey guys sorry for my absence.. But I'm on the brink of madness lately beacuse of usual shit. Anyway,

I think common sense can solve it all, but how?

Users must refrain from personal remarks. That is as simple as it is. Sometimes we use jokes, and more often they can be a bit harsh, I admit it. But they are "salt and pepper of the meal", aren't they. But there are times and situations where any little joke cannot be present. The latest incident and tragic loss of a father, son and a husband is one of those times. There simply cannot be any subjective / emotional message than sympathy and condolescents. That is it, no tolerance.

I see on WAFF a lot of keyboard warriors crying for revenge (on both sides paradoxically), I even see such remarks hidden beneath sentences on well respected forums by well respected members.

The incident ignited discussions about FIR, Aegean etc (on f-16.net they even discussed 1920 events and Ionian culture!). This is natural and unevadable. But place and time for such discussions is different. Although such matters are discussed without result zillions of times, and although opening a thread about Greco-Turco relations is a reason for banning on MP.net, I think it is time to do something different.

We are not diplomats, we are not soldiers, we are not members of parliaments, we are not bureaucrats. We are simply nerds who waste tonnes of time in front of monitors, eating millions of tonnes of radiation for killing our precious sperms just for psycho-nationalistic masturbation. If we really want to do "something" we must do something different, this shitty brain thinks.

If someone googles "Athens Istanbul FIR" what can he get?

Millions of web and forum pages with millions and millions of endless shit. At the end of the day, that unfortunate mortal would end up reading all of them (if he got the nerve and patience) without a slightest clue of the nature of the problem and possible solutions. I see that the world is sick of our endless duels.

As WCF, if we are honest with our motives and desires of founding this forum, I think we must do something constructive. I think we must collect all relative documents (already we have a good reference section). We must collect all relative arguments and valuable discussions. And at the end something like this may come up:

"Aegean Disputes, FIR Issue, Greek Theses"
"Aegean Disputes, FIR Issue, Turkish Theses"

And forbid all further discussions about the subject except the inputs in the quality of that work, i.e someone comes up saying "hey guys, I have an article about the issue and think it might have some place here, here are my sources and arguments etc". We discuss and decide to put it in. All other shit are worthless and only lead us to tonnes of pages and wasting of precious bandwith and time (more important death of our precious sperms!!!)

As for immediate measures... I think we can wait people a little bit to calm down. I see that the situation isn't out of control as in f-16.net and WAFF thanks to the quality of WCF and invaluable efforts of you gentlemen. I think we are good for now and can wait a little bit. Then we can either close or clean the accident topic, and then discuss further measures with the light of our observations on this and other forums.

We have a nearly perfect rule base. We must also underline the vital importance of our rules to all forumers.

For now, I don't think that there is nothing to worry much. That was a tragic and "high temperature" incident, it is natural to have some very emotional and mostly stupid messages. That is only a short period of shock and vibration for the forum. As a system dynamics MSc, I guarantee you that it will settle to a stable position. If it doesn't you can kill all my precious sperms :P

My best to you all gentlemen, you are doing a fantastic job. I'm proud of you.

Arda

:thumbsup: Excactly my theses...too bro









except this sperm thing...damn you maid me concern now.. :o

Well since i'm the one responsible for this thread i must state again my thesis..

First of all i was not following the forum for some months now.
I started posting again with main scope to learn what people in Turkey believed about what appeared to me as a growing tension period (that was one day before the collision event.. that is to be forseeing bad things huh? :))
From the first moment i've noticed that the tone in the forum was a bit.. dall should i call it? reflecting some boredom? too quite for the forum i left behind? anyway something was not right to my eyes...

As you said orko and i agree 100%

I will not agree that we are nerds destroying our sperm though (mine anyway gets too much radiation for years now since i'm in the IT business for living, the forum wont make it worse :))

What i seek in this forum is to learn what people believe. What Turkish people believe. I see it as a quest in approaching (since finding it is much to ask sometimes) the truth to specific issues and in more general ones...

I believe that a forum should be a way of exchanging ideas and opinions.. In a civilised way, i agree.. in an orderly manner, also agree... BUT(!) personal views, not just references to articles, official statements and media reports...
i agree that it seems rather elegant to just collect each sides thesis and present it, it appears also a very civilised and mature way of doing things but it is not a forum then.. it is a library.. a portal...

People should talk, try to find something more.. back it up whenever possible with references but for me the important is what you can't find by google but what everyone has in his mind about things.. a genuine personal opinion even if it is stupid, wrong, not well formed, not well supported by evidence.. even if it is just a "gut feeling"... even this has its value and may be more important sometimes than all the articles you can find in the press... philosophy is a quest for knowledge and for truth... and requires discussion and exchange of ideas, not just studying of static material.. evolutions comes from movement, not stability...

On this context i believe that if we are trying to control everything and keep things always in a well defined order, then the forum will start beeing a bit out of scope... will lose all that little important things that make it a forum and provide the info and the "feeling" that make it different from just surfing the news...

I believe that most (if not all) people in here are capable of performing civilised talks, judge what's right or wrong according to their views/character/info and question what needs clarification.. anyway, beeing convinced or convincing someone else is not the point of a forum.. it should not even be the aim of any forumer.. everyone in here is working and should work for his own quest towards the "truth", not try to force his view on others.. one side presents his thesis, the other his one and then both try to find faults in each other not in order to proove something but in order to understand better what is right and what is wrong in absolute terms.. the point is not to reach a conclusion but for everyone interested to get a better and more spherical view...

That's more or less my view and my objections to the forum operation... but that's me.. others may feel that archiving articles and news is a more appropriate way for them to communicate and find answers to their own quest.. i totaly respect it but i prefer personal views and feelings :)

Damn since you mentioned ..WERE IS 123-t... :P

My initial though would be that he is working full time copying and pasting links of news articles on some other forum till he becomes a Grand Master General with 8 stars and 3 crossed swords but if i say that in here i may be accused for beeing insulting to a fellow forumer... just kidding :lol:

I have to admit that i miss his unpresedented ability to pop up questions... :rolleyes:

Dourie and Orko, those responces are what make this forum special. I fully agree on as much/any expression as anyone wants, but keep it respectful. You can say damt near anything you reasonably believe, as long as you don't make hatefull comments about people/countries, etc, "generalizing"... When things get heated, tempers fly, and I think we should be firm but flexible in these situations, people crack once in a while, especialy with "hot" incidents... I do belive the mod team showed flexability during the monitoring of the thread. I also must admit that the mod team was on it and helped prevent the thread from being locked. Considering how hot this issue was, overall a very good job was done, and valuable experience learned for next time... Credit also to all the members who controlled their temper and tried to proceed akordingly. Together, we can be united, devided, opposed and contrary as you want, as long as you don't talk sh!t about someone/etc... Not such a difficult rule, no?

:friendship: ,

Besides the short-termed absence the apparently felt former omnipresence through active presence was compensated by an indirect representation through the rather often repetition of the writer´s name which, to a certain extent, helped directly or indirectly, deliberately or unintentionally, to the maintenance of the wanted or unwanted, felt or unfelt omnipresence.




Apparently, this appears, inter alia, to be a topic about the degree of subjectivity and similarily the degree of objectivity that is "good" in this particular "talking unit".


For the purpose of answering this issue in a more adequate way:

What exactly is the mid-term or final aim of the raised discussions ?


If one considers it as rapprochement of long-term foes only cross-cultural objectivity, that is to say the highest possible grade of scientific evaluation of problems in order to see the fundamental reasons of problems, is crucial..


If the aim is to entertain self-employed IT specialist and other businessmen, which, by the way, create urgently needed jobs in their countries, then open your mind and let all subjectivity outside until the satisfaction of your need is attained. One might conclude that after a severe dose of subjectivity man loses all his aggression, emotions or similar and becomes peaceful so that the same end might be attained with different means.


As often the best and the most viable solution is potentially the intermingling of both, only the appropriate recipe for this has to be found.

A question might also be:

Is ignorance between us or is it culturally different approaches and thus biased thoughts ?

Huh???? :doubt:

What are you talking about 123-t? are you sure you're in the right thread? this looks like an article from some philosophy/social psychology related magazine... you remind me of a Greek professor of political science (if that can be called science) named Zouraris... he can talk hours about a topic without practically even touching it and still make everyone believe that he said something important...

Can you apply a more "to the point" approach please? Also your opinion and any proposals instead of questions and hypothetical approaches to a theoritical "problem" or "topic area"?

Yes it might also be but it is not in this thread.. The topic is writing methods and forum scope not interpersonal relations and cultural differences.. :)

slight thought....


Dont "touch" Zouraris....I have the honor to call hem my personall friend since 1988...a great person in privat...were he gets to the point immidiatly... ;)
one of the greatest new philophers...a great mind...and an expert in Thoucidides ;)

123-t Welcome back we missed you...wer have you been...?
Dourios was worried...cause you disappeard with hes appiriance... :applause:

I like Zouraris because he said that the football team Paok should play in amateur league because it has millions of debts to the state.

Please stick to the topic,make football remarks in the appropriate section.

edited by cameleon1975

P.S. I too think that Paok sucks :lol:

Excactly why i Love the man...

But he is a hot PAOK fan you have to know... <_<



















:P

Why do i get the feeling that my re-appearance brought a "wind" of disorganasation to the forum? How PAOK poped up in here? :unsure:

Now seriously, why none else is willing to presents his thoughts about how a forum should work and what should be the objectives of it? I was expecting to hear also from modus, hades, Cid, cameleon, beleg, efeler (where is he btw?), 123-t (not a responce like the previous stuff again please), kursaros (another missing in action forum fighter) and many others... also your comments, if any, Lord and orko on my suggestions...

"If one considers it (the final objective of the forum) as rapprochement of long-term foes (objective) only cross-cultural objectivity (means to achieve it), that is to say the highest possible grade of scientific evaluation of problems in order to see the fundamental reasons of problems, is crucial..."


How (and why (3) ) might this "highest degree of objectivity" be achieved ?

1. Seeing the facts and accepting them ,at least temporarily, as correct. (description --> precondition is a functioning information system)

2. Explaining what we are perceiving as facts. (explanation ---> precondition is an "appropriate", to the highest possible extent, unbiased reasoning)

3. Finding consilience if possible to solve a problem (decision-making)

That's better 123-t.. and the parenthesis really helped alot, i wouldn't even use them if i was trying to present the point that we should be openminded in so many words as you did :)

BTW, in which line of business are you in? Do you always write in a such "obfuscated" way or you're studing something similar latetly and you practice on us? (and out nerves i would dare to say :) sorry, i don't mean to be bad, i have a tendency to sarcasm and saying out loud what i believe that i really can't constrain.. i've tried everything!)

I will agree with you except on number 3.. we're not here for solving problems and we don't have the power or means to do so... the rest is a nice approach but probably not feasible since it has a lot of prerequisits that it is practically imposible to request by the number of participants of a forum...
Your approach is holistic and can easily "brake apart" even if one small "component" disfunctions, thus only good in theory IMHO..

Indeed, a plethora of factors could influence the degree of viability.



But one might be sure:

Apathy in nearly whatever form and in virtually whatever dose is equivalent to a sentence of death to this apparent "theory for a better world".



Potentially, the catalyst of the thought of being unconscious might be found in the form of the governmental system which pushes, to a certain extent, to the passivity of the indiviudal and thus the huge masses.

Although one shouldnt neglect possible advantages of the indirect system.

I am not smart enough to understand half of the discussion above..

The mod team has my full support in editing my messages if they dont suit the forum rules.I have been in internet enviroment long enough to see some really weird mods, channel/forum admins who have personality problems. This is one of the rare places where the moderation team works really hard and in return gets over criticized.. Compare it to other online forums where moderation team behaves like kings of old..I am glad to be a part of this forum as it is..

I had personally thanked Camelon for editing the F-16 thread in a propriate way.What he did was right and is his job. I hope the team keeps up the good work. :drink:

Well moderation methods is not exactly the issue here my friend beleg.. i would focus mainly on what a forum should be and what each one of us should expect from a forum.. it's more of a general discussion about exchange of ideas and how it should be performed (although 123-t tries to push us to a higher level of consiousness! :))

123-t are you a person or a bot? sometimes when i read your posts i get the impression that somebody put a "collection" of standard, sofisticated, intelectual phrases in a program that generates sentences by arbitrarily combining these phrases... i made such a program few months ago for teaching purposes (and because it was fun..) :)

Here's a possible responce of my program with your words :)
"Indeed, apathy in nearly whatever form and in virtually whatever dose is the catalyst to a sentence of death to a plethora of factors that could influence this apparent "theory for a better world" and it's degree of viability.
Potentially, the equivalent of the thought of being unconscious might be found in the passivity of the individual and in the form of huge masses which pushes, to a certain extent, the form of the governmental system, and thus neglect possible advantages of the indirect system."

:headbang:

I tried, but I cant help it... :hahaha: damn Dourie, you're killing me! (no offence 123, but he does have a point :dunno: perhaps you're on another level, maybe bring it down for us normal folks?)

And as far as methods of expression, my comment made earlier in this thread still tands...

Let us call the bot, 123-t2.

I am sure he will soon become another fellow member.


In order to integrate him more fastly into our superb community, the welcome procedure will be taken over by his predecessor, who constructed 23th July of 2005 is to be send to the scrap metal.

123-t: Welcome 123-t2.

Cid: Welcome in the Krankenhaus 123-t2.

Thermopyles: Wilkommen (ps mine Deutsch bist zer schlecht ) , 123-t2

beleg: Welcome 123-t2.

Hades: Herzliches Willkommen !

modus: Welcome 123-t2 !

Lord: Its a plessure to have you among us...

Wilkommen...

Please 123-t don't take my words (and jokes) personaly.. i mean no offence or disrespect.. i'm just too sarcastic sometimes and it is easy to wake up in me the practical joker i used to be when i was quite younger... (well i'm still but don't tell anyone)

I just find your posts a bit weird and, as i said before, obfuscated... most times you seem to walk on a thin line between on topic and off topic (IMHO many times you're a bit off) and since you prefered to continue in the same line even after i made my first comments about your writting, i found it a good idea to joke a bit about it just for showing how easy it is to sound sofisticated without actually beeing :)

Why don't you try to write simple words that everyone can understand.. isn't it better to share your thoughts with everyone? isn't this the point of posting here anyway?

(I still want to know what is your occupation.. it must be interesting... and please, don't bring a t2 in here.. i wouldn't survive two of you..) :gang beat:

no, no, no need for T1 to be sent to the scrap heap! just some revision to the translation/interaction processor! :P So I'll save my beautiful Alemanian welcomes for someone else :lol:

:drink: ,

1. Criticism of being off-topic --> we actually discuss 123-t´s writing method which obviously harms subjective eyes.
--> Argument invalid.


2. Forced appearance of sophistication plus antagonism between apparently high sophistication and low communicative value of the written text.
--> Argument declared invalid due to its high content of subjectivity and by virtue non-binding compliance of absolute conformity with a non-existing forum rule.


3. Objective of discussion is to communicate. Argument valid.


Thanks for the communication. Happy to see you back in the forum !

:roflmao: Brilliant!

@123-t

Its good to have you back among us, I kind of missed you, lol
And your writing style is fine, it is just unconventional which at the same time is refreshing :thumbsup:

@topic issue

Moderation is always to certain extend needed. But as much as focusing on the content that is subject for moderation, equally important is the way by which moderation takes place. This forum is build by people of different backgrounds and perspectives, but with the same goal, to establish a forum through which people can have dialogue on equal terms without any hostile intentions against other participants. Yet sometimes moderation is needed, since various people are taking part in this forum for various reasons and thus conflicting topics occur with behaviour that is in breach with the forum and invision rules or more in general that is not appropriate with the generally excepted ethics and moral.
To guarantee that this moderation is conducted fairly, we had established the current system and subforums, which were to guarantee separation of powers and transparency of the moderative efforts.

So the issue isn’t rather that we should examine the writing methods or to define the limits on freedom of speech, but rather to apply the reforms we intended in the first place. That is why I advised that the moderators should write down all their moderative actions in the Executive Body forum and if the mods jointly decide on a subject like closing/moving/moderating a topic, to make such statement in the Executive Body.

I also want to remark that I regret that the Council did not take any actions regarding reconciliation or declarations in tensed moments. I think this is partly because the Council didnt take any real shape which again is partly due to the fact it is hard to combine with other official positions in the forum aside that of a member, let alone your professional and private life.

Thus I would like to suggest a reformation of the Council. The admins should be only official members of the Council, while in practise they will delegate their powers of reconciliation, law-making and ethics to 4 respected Council members which periodically will be open for office by members. The decisions of the Council can be formed by these 4 people, though offical post of the Administrators would be needed for the ratification of any mandatory rule made by the Council.
This Council should not only look into reconciliation but also whether the moderative actions where justifiable based on rules and principles.

Thus the Forum Administration will then be layered, whereby the moderators take up moderative issues of daily conduct, the council is responsible of devising rules and overlooking the moderation efforts, the ISS is responsible for technical and security matters and the Admins overlook the entire administration and are representatives of the forum.

To achieve this, all participants of the forum are to respect this system and co-operate in the establishing this system. Meaning;
-That a moderator, when moderating a post or topic, makes a clear notification of his action in the appropriate place and also doesnt delete the post but simply moves it to an archive.
-That a member that has an issue with moderation, asks the Executive Body (all mods) to look whether this moderation was justifiable and if he disagrees with their answer and if the moderation had serious consequences, takes it up to the Council to look into it and respect their decision.
-That a member who has an problem of general issue regarding the forum, the members or the administration, takes this directly to the Council.
-That members of the Council take their job seriously in reconciliation and law-making and ethics and make clear statements when great tense is at hand and to anticipate future tensions and develop rules to circumvent such tensions while still keeping intact the dynamism of dialogues and discussions
-That the ISS remain clearly within the limits of their responsibilities and do not take any action than that related strictly to the ISS.
-That the administrators strictly keep out of any moderation efforts, overlook whether all forum officials remain within their respective powers and pursue to guarantee dialogue and discussion trough respectable means.

By the way this topic belongs to the Lobby section.

Hahahaha.. well you definently have your own unique way.. let it be your way then mate.. i have no problem following your thinking...

Actually on your first comment i (we) got a bit off topic since i (we) started discussing your posts instead of the general methods/ways that was the topic.. fault noted and bug fixed ;)
I'm not going to comment about what your posts harm because i told you, i'm sarcastic and i can easily cross the lines.. but i personaly tent to be more objective than you think and i always tell what i believe straight to the others face even if there is a risk to be wrong or misunderstood.. you'll get to know me better :)

For your second comment.. well now you're beeing bad but no hard feelings, i pushed it a bit more than i should maybe even if i didn't have the intention you described... but my (our) views are not that subjective.. your post are difficult to understand and easily misunderstood, even if they comply with forum rules... so argument, lets say partially valid (my God i started compromising! <_< )

I'm happy to talk with you too 123-t :)

aaa.. by the way.. are you gonna tell me what are you doing for living or should i quit asking?

Sounds rather good Cid.. i like it.. flexible and fare.. i would only suggest immediate actions by mods on direct insults.. this is easy to understand and needs no discussion actually...
(you should consider a political science or law related carreer.. managment it would be suited too :))

And, good to see you again mate..

Thank you Dourios,

you are not the first one to suggest a politcs/law carreer, I am actually a student in these fields.

Indeed your suggestion about the moderation of direct insults speak for themselves. I didnt specify on the content that is subject for moderations but rather the way by which moderation is executed, the position of a member in this process and the overall forum system.

It is good to hear from you also :friendship:

Cid, sounds OK, but my concern is with how big of a role is the "reconciliation" you speak of going to play? How will it be defined and applied? Will the desire for reconciliation stifle the debates and feelings of the representitive member, about the ussues pertinant to him/her?

Anyways, thats a sidenote. If I were to change/add/amend anything, I would make a "Forum Declaration" of what WFC stands for/fosters/believes in.

Ex: Would Conflicts Forum Declaration Of Intention:
- To serve as a grounds for a full and panoramic debate of issues pertaining to todays issues.
- To promote understanding and iteraction between rivals.
- To bring conflicting cultures together, promoting peace, prosperity, and resolution between said factions.
- To provide a healthy grounds for respectful diologue for members of all backgrounds to debate.

Etc.,

:drink: ,

The rules are clear.
But rules always leave space for interpretation issues.

If the admins and mods believe the rules are broken, they should confront the member responsible for the remark. And ask him for explanation. They could always "trial" him.

To imply censorship isn't, in my opinion, the solution. Perhaps it might calm the forum for a couple of hours, even days. But it doesn't change the feelings, nor the thoughts of the members. In the long term implimentation of any kind of censorship will not have the desired effect.



Personally, I know that at times a might have made a remark that could be interpreted the wrong way. However if needed I am fully capable of taking any responses and always capable to explain my motivations behind any remark...


However I don't like the current situation, in which we aren't allowed to react to hostile and insulting remarks, but the origin of the first hostile remark isn't called for explanation for his actions either...


A final observation: by allowing the mods to censor every thread, they believe to be insulting, could create a negative sphere.
Perhaps a thread should be created in which the motivate their decission, it would certainly make the situation much clearer.

eg. In stead of just remarking "the post was insulting", a motivation should be given by the moderator why it is insulting and why it result in deleting the thread (the motivation should of course fightable by the member involved).

This suggested approach is more elaborate, but certainly is an improvement in terms of making a transparent and clear policy and even in terms of respecting the rights of the members.

Reconciliation is the broad definition, it can be applied both in the positive and negative sense.

The positive sense is when 2 or more members are in great tension with eachother. Than the Council can act to either find a common ground between members, motivate them in normalising their 'relationship' to eachother or compromise on the issue itself.

The negative sense is when the Council makes an end to a tension on a certain dispute by an official declaration. Making an end shouldn’t mean the end of dialogue, but rather end of the discussion related to the animosity between the conflicting members. Also the Moderators should take this as an indication to take a more alerted stance, both in the moderating member posts, but also their own moderative efforts.

Regarding the Would Conflicts Forum Declaration Of Intention:

I dont think this would be suitable because the intention of members, or actually the reason for participating, are very personal and defer on individual basis. Also the content of this forum differs greatly, touching all kinds of subjects.
Thus IMHO we should rather remain having a simplified goal which is compatible with the members personal reasons in participating, like; "dialogue and discussion through respectable means or on basis of mutual respect."

@ Cid
Indeed trying to make a narrow definition in judicial context, always leads to undesired effects (either overkills or big gaps)...
Simple rules (and goals), with a large area for interpretation for the judge, work the best.

However a problem might evolve, because the mods act as combined judges and executive branche (kind of judge and cop in one). Therefor I believe the mods should always give a good explanation, to the community or communities (they way you like to see it) in this forum, about their actions.

In WAFF we saw this wasn't done, which resulted in losing the connection between admin/mod and the participating communities. (or have we forgotten that we complained about the ignorant Lunatic etc. who couldn't understand us..)

There is already such a forum called the Executive Body. This is the operational platform for the moderators.

I already made a suggestion for futher seperation of powers, you can read it in my post on the 2nd page of this topic ;)

Well we could discuss about "reconcilition", but its just a sidetrack- most of what you speak of we already do...

Pindos you're not alone in your concerns I's sure. For you to say it means others are also thinking it, and I believe they need attention. If you don't mind, start a new thred with them and lets see if we can get some more direct questions and answers...

Reconciliation already exists as a specific responsibility of the admins (though often also the mods rely on it).

When the admins delegate this responsibility to the council it has advantages:
-moderation and reconciliation are not mixed, thus making the work for moderators more suitable for objectively based decisions on moderation.
-the council, which takes no part in moderation or in any other way influencing the member, will be responsible for the reconciliation process, which will ease the development of it and its fairness.

good comments and advises indeed my friends...all should be considered...

But allready as Thermopylles stated..we are the most fair forum among all others...
mistakes can occure from time to time...
so alot of members have to reconsider how difficould it is...to keep things in here fair and square... and also beeing "flexibell"...

we are trying our best...and we managed to keep the forum clean for all the time...
even if we have lost some members...or beeing accused alot of times...as Turco or greco philes...

Regards