How long before I get banned?

[lirruping]

If I'm seriously thinking about this (and I seem to have devoted my whole lunchtime to it, lol) I should probably do it in a private conversation group with people who are interested so that the whole plan is not plain to ECF mods. On the other hand, I could be wrong, but I believe that even publicly discussing a strategy like a signature line bomb will probably not reduce its effectiveness. A lot would depend on numbers, timing, strength of message, and the ability to create multiple accounts--which I am not even sure is possible over there. Do they have some way of blocking the previously banned from creating an account for the purpose of one or two posts? We need Anonymous to put vaping on their agenda. Calling Anonymous...pm me Anonymous.

 

[stevegmu]

the vast majority of threads where are fearmongering? On ECF? That isn't my impression, but maybe. I stick to a few areas. Thing is, "Anti Nicotine and Tobacco Zealots" or not--whatever the "enemies" of vaping are, we are in a way better position to think through what to do about it and to preserve the rights/privileges we have, etc, in a forum where free expression is allowed. This is true despite the nasty outbursts and lack of focus and whatever else--bad language, say--that may come along with a free and open forum. VapingUnderground has the right idea to tolerate all of that for greater good, IMO.

Edit- What is NUTZ an acronym for?

Yes. People get worked up and buy gallons of nic... Few thread titles actually match proposed legislation. Few actually read the legislation and few are capable of intelligent discussion...
If the NUTZ on that forum write letters to the Deciders, they are doing more harm than good...

NUTZ is a YAMA. It means nothing. They went nuts trying to figure it out. It is a joke at their constant references to ANTZ...

 

[lirruping]

They don't want debate or discussion. Threads start out as a circle jerk. When Group Think gets challenged, they post pictures of bacon and threads get closed...

They have a lot of members because they employ a lot of Google search bots. There are only dozens of active members who make 20 or more posts/day, it seems, in the General Discussion threads and less in the media and campaigning threads...

Wow. Well if that's true--that there are only a few dozen posters on ECF, I have totally wasted an hour or more on this topic. But I'm not convinced that's the case.

I have noticed the whole closing the thread routine...which is totally counter-productive to creating long-term data resources. That's a REALLY clear example of skewed priorities showing that they value control over community and information sharing.

 

[stevegmu]

Wow. Well if that's true--that there are only a few dozen posters on ECF, I have totally wasted an hour or more on this topic. But I'm not convinced that's the case.

I have noticed the whole closing the thread routine...which is totally counter-productive to creating long-term data resources. That's a REALLY clear example of skewed priorities showing that they value control over community and information sharing.

There are always a lot of new posters, but look at the long threads and you will see the same posters- me included, until I get bored and move on. When they can no longer have a rational discussion, they post vids, pictures or memes. Mostly bacon.

 

[lirruping]

Yes. People get worked up and buy gallons of nic... Few thread titles actually match proposed legislation. Few actually read the legislation and few are capable of intelligent discussion...
If the NUTZ on that forum write letters to the Deciders, they are doing more harm than good...

NUTZ is a YAMA. It means nothing. They went nuts trying to figure it out. It is a joke at their constant references to ANTZ...

Most are capable of intelligent discussion if they are motivated. And you don't have engage in it anyway to participate in a signature line action. It just needs to be something with broad appeal and as described above.

Well, it sounds like your vote is for "let them rot over there, we don't need no steenking ECF people". My sense is that "we" do need all the help we can get, and that people are capable of a lot if properly informed and motivated. Also that, as I said, there are a lot more than a few dozen people posting over there plus the unknown number that don't join or participate but are everyday getting their information through ECF.

I gotta get some work done.

 

[stevegmu]

Most are capable of intelligent discussion if they are motivated. And you don't have engage in it anyway to participate in a signature line action. It just needs to be something with broad appeal and as described above.

Well, it sounds like your vote is for "let them rot over there, we don't need no steenking ECF people". My sense is that "we" do need all the help we can get, and that people are capable of a lot if properly informed and motivated. Also that, as I said, there are a lot more than a few dozen people posting over there plus the unknown number that don't join or participate but are everyday getting their information through ECF.

I gotta get some work done.

They drive the rational people away from their cause; not just non smokers or smokers, but even vapers...

 

[pcrdude]

Does anyone know if the "Outside" got closed on ECF? I think they just prohibited me (and maybe others) from access, but I don't know for sure.

Thanks...

 

[stevegmu]

It's open. I just posted there in the oyster thread...

 

[pcrdude]

Thanks!!! I was just curious. I closed my account there anyway.

 

[sub4me]

I will agree they do have some large numbers over there but also realize many of those are banned members and members who never come back or came by to get the information they wanted and aren't interested in posting.

The majority of posts are the same old bunch which post the same old opinion and agenda over and over and over. There's no real debate and as such the forum could easily function as read only because any counter points made are deleted, edited, or lost in the mountain of bullshit the cliques post. If a member posts a good counter point they will pile on until its so buried no one will ever read it unless they want to dig through a hundred pages of nonsense and bacon pics.

Trying to organize a signature line with any impact would be a monumental task at the very least and as it began to build momentum it would surely be shut down, deleted, and warnings issued. I get your idea but in reality it would be close to impossible. Also I have no doubt they read over here so the mods and admin are very aware how people feel, they just don't care. Its all about feeding the vendors customers and keeping the profits coming in.

NUTZ is the perfect signature line cause they know exactly what it means, lol, but I agree many don't. However after they get a taste of that place it doesn't take to long to realize something isn't right and the extremists are leading the herd.

 

[pcrdude]

Sub4me, that is why I wanted my account closed. I don't want to be affiliated with a "community" which is so biased in it's moderation. My latest infraction (which landed me in the sin-bin) was so innocuous as to have made me laugh out loud (literally) when I found out what it was.....

"Lots of straw men around here"....

 

[sub4me]

Pcr, what did you do exactly or say and which whiner scolded you for it??

I'm not sure I recall you there did you use a different screen name??

 

[pcrdude]

Same name, same person. After my "sin-bin", I read my "infraction" and it was basically "there are lot of straw men in here" or something to that effect. CW gave me the ban. It was certainly nothing overly inflammatory in comparison to the bitch slapping I was getting from SM, bones and justin......

And I had had enough!

I would LOVE it if CW would come here and get the spanking she deserves for behaving as she has. Alas, I doubt she has the constitution or skills.....

 

[pcrdude]

If I'm seriously thinking about this (and I seem to have devoted my whole lunchtime to it, lol) I should probably do it in a private conversation group with people who are interested so that the whole plan is not plain to ECF mods. On the other hand, I could be wrong, but I believe that even publicly discussing a strategy like a signature line bomb will probably not reduce its effectiveness. A lot would depend on numbers, timing, strength of message, and the ability to create multiple accounts--which I am not even sure is possible over there. Do they have some way of blocking the previously banned from creating an account for the purpose of one or two posts? We need Anonymous to put vaping on their agenda. Calling Anonymous...pm me Anonymous.

In my opinion, the ECF members (and mods) should be called out to argue their positions. Here or somewhere else, it matters not. If they are "right" it should be easy for them. If they are "wrong", they will refuse the "challenge" and may then be labeled as the reader sees fit.

I'm guessing the latter.....

 

[lirruping]

In my opinion, the ECF members (and mods) should be called out to argue their positions. Here or somewhere else, it matters not. If they are "right" it should be easy for them. If they are "wrong", they will refuse the "challenge" and may then be labeled as the reader sees fit.

I'm guessing the latter.....

Yes, of course it's the latter. They don't argue their position because they don't have to. They can always refer anyone to the rules they themselves agreed to on joining (leaving aside their wacky and whimsical interpretations of said rules) then close the discussion or the thread, warn, ban--whatever. That is why if it is worth thinking about ways to impact or communicate with the ECF user base, any effective result won't take the form of a normal, civilized discussion, certainly not with the moderators. The "going by the usual protocols" type of options are just not on the table because it's like it or lump it over there. Which, by the way, plenty of people are willing to accept and even defend. As long as its not phrased in that particular way. We must have some semblance of dignity. (Or something).

As has been pointed out, discussing the rules of ECF in a way that is deemed negative by the mods is itself against the rules. That leaves no straightforward option for influencing the situation.

Those who responded to the signature line bomb idea described earlier thought it was too much trouble--would take too much energy, might not be effective anyway, etc. The other objection was that people would not be interested or that people are too dumb--oh, and that there just plain aren't enough people using ECF for it to matter.

Has anyone noticed there is always a thread going here about ecf, into which people pour limitless energy to bitch and gripe?
Now, maybe the function of these threads is just to blow off steam, which is fine--whatever--perfectly valid. But given the amount of steam that clearly exists, it's obvious to me that the energy or capability to get some kind of effective action together is not what's at issue. It's simply a matter of interest and will.

At the moment, both of mine are in short supply. I spose I will revisit in some other place/way the ideas I've kicked around here when I have recharged have something more concrete to offer. Adieu, sweet thread, and happy grumbling!

 

[sub4me]

I'd really like to see any of those assholes come here and give a us a real debate they wouldn't know what to do without Classlesswife and Robino being able to delete posts that oppose their points of view.

 

[lordmage]

well i know they have read post in other forums and in some cases even created alternative ids to post as normal people.
The main problem is if they were to openly debate ECF rules they would get banned even if the debate was here on VU. it is a no no for them to even do it.
Most of the moderation staff there is a company paid to over see the day operations. there are a few who are unpaid but not many. in terms of why they are so messed up is the paid staff has to adhere to company policy which creates the over moderation they have. i know this because i used to be a non paid moderator over there a very long time ago right when said company was taking control which is when i stepped down.

 

[Thrasher]

But I like bacon

Whats wrong with bacon...?.

 

[lirruping]

well i know they have read post in other forums and in some cases even created alternative ids to post as normal people.
The main problem is if they were to openly debate ECF rules they would get banned even if the debate was here on VU. it is a no no for them to even do it.
Most of the moderation staff there is a company paid to over see the day operations. there are a few who are unpaid but not many. in terms of why they are so messed up is the paid staff has to adhere to company policy which creates the over moderation they have. i know this because i used to be a non paid moderator over there a very long time ago right when said company was taking control which is when i stepped down.

It's not clear to me what the company you're talking about (the one that you say owns ECF) has to gain by implementing all their fascist-type policies. Is there some money angle on it that I'm not seeing? I can see where the they might not want to scare away advertisers and registered vendors off with a forum full of illegal drug talk or hate-speech, but aside from that, I honestly don't see the point of all the rules.

The mods come off as a bunch of insecure clique-mongers trying to satisfy the internal demands of the "supervisor syndrome" they seem to be experiencing. But if it's as you say--they are just "following orders" (where do I remember that phrase from?) then there must be some rationale, at some level, for having all those rules. But they don't even like it when you speculate about what the motives for the rules might be--doing so can be construed as "speaking negatively about the rules".