jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
11 points (92% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

PornOverlords

subscribeunsubscribe801Over 110 subreddits served readers
~5 Lords of Porn online users here now
SFWPORN NETWORK
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN JOINING THE NETWORK FEEL FREE TO MAKE A POST AND WE CAN DISCUSS IT. ALL ADDITIONS ARE DONE VIA VOTING ON FRIDAYS AFTER DISCUSSION
PornOverlords is a discussion subreddit for The SFWPorn Network. Here we discuss and vote on network policy, discuss problems or changes to the network, introduce new moderators, introduce new subreddits, ask questions, and talk about anything else related to the network.
Anyone can submit or comment but only network moderators' votes will be counted in official vote threads. The FAQ explains how we do all of this.
Full information on the handling of Official Threads can be found here. Please note that the policy changed on March 14, 2014.

NEW - Upcoming SFWPorn Subreddits

OTHER SUBREDDITS (not) WORTH YOUR TIME:
Voting in official vote threads:
SURE - [](/yes)
NO THANKS - [](/no)
PASS - [](/abstain)
created by [deleted]a community for
message the moderators

MODERATORS

10
11
12
submitted by creesch
I think at least a certain percentage of the mods needs in the sfw sub should agree to such a decision before it is carried out.
Doesn't need to be a majority, but it should need to have a good amount of support. Out the top of my head I am thinking one third of the mods.
all 83 comments
[–]davidreiss666 9 points10 points11 points  (8 children)
That's common sense.
[–]creesch[S] 5 points6 points7 points  (7 children)
You would think it is, yet here we have the top mod of the biggest sfw sub doing exactly that.
[–]Br00ce 0 points1 point2 points  (6 children)
didnt this also happen with you and /r/mapporn?
[–]creesch[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (5 children)
Not that I know of?
[–]Br00ce 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
Oh I thought you got kicked there bc you didnt let the top mod in /r/modtalk bc he said he was going to leak stuff.
[–]creesch[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
Oh that, I didn't mapporn at the time. I did get banned by the top mod though.
[–]Br00ce 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
ah ok.
[–]Lurlur 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
Oh lord, there's no getting away from you today, is there?
[–]Br00ce 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
I was here first and you replied to my comments and pinged me on slack. Really there isnt a way to get away from you today.
[–]noeatnosleep 5 points6 points7 points  (2 children)
Jesus. Especially when they're that fucking inactive.
[–]saldejumssaldejums -1 points0 points1 point  (1 child)
yeah, fuck'em
[–]karmicviolence 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Let's not resort to personal attacks, please.
[–]jaxspiderGreenPowerRanger 1 point2 points3 points  (13 children)
As mentioned in the mod mail(s) related to the removal of /u/lurlur,
  1. It was a preventative measure. One that Soupy, Kjones & KV were all notified well in advance would happen if Lurlur's behavior / actions kept becoming worse.
  2. There was already precedence set well before I removed a mod, when another mod was removed due to the exact same reasons as Lurlur's.
  3. I agree we should vote on most matters... but how can people vote publicly on potentially kicking a fellow mod? What if the vote falls, then that mod may hold grudges. Now what if the mod that didn't get vote kicked off is above someone they now hold a grudge on? This is a formula for disaster. A formula I do not wish to see experimented on in a DEFAULT subreddit. If we decide something like that, we'd need to work out all the fine details before anything become official.
[–]unknown_nameYou get all my K's 6 points7 points8 points  (6 children)
But the rest of "the team" wasn't notified and that is the issue.
You can't preach teamwork and then leave the rest of us out in the dark, especially when 75% of the work is done by us.
[–]jaxspiderGreenPowerRanger -1 points0 points1 point  (5 children)
What I did was... Warn 3 senior mods of the potential harm Lurlur may cause. When Lurlur crossed lines that should not have been crossed, such as

...revealing personal information, leaking private conversations, being unprofessional in modmail with a 3rd party present, trying to sabotage a subreddit, getting banned, ban dodging, getting her account suspended by an admin, admitting in a podcast to further plans of sabotage.

If you need proof of any of the above claims, I got it.
You may see why I feared that she may continue to do further damage in a default subreddit. Harming the crown jewel of our network's credibility. I was not about to allow that, not on my watch.
Like I said, it was simply a preventative measure. I acknowledge she has never done anything negative to Earthporn in the past, but I just could not risk that chance. Especially since I was the one to bring her on board in the first place.
The problem with notifying the rest of the team is that Lurlur was still on the team at the time. And if she knew I was considering removing her she may do something else far worse. Lurlur's removal was not an easy choice, it was a worst case scenario.
I know from an outsider's perspective my actions may come off as mod abuse or dictatorship or spitefulness. From mine, I made the hard call and choice professionalism over friendship.
[–]Lurlur 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
Making something bold and large doesn't make it more true, it just makes you look like a teenager.
Personal information? Everyone else is saying I doxxed you. But putting it in context would kinda kill that witch hunt, wouldn't it?
Conversations in a public channel aren't private, and sharing them with concerned parties isn't leaking. The other mods deserved to know that their opinions never mattered to you and that you didn't care about the team, our hard work or our friendship.
Sabotage? Elaborate.
Can't blame me for getting banned. That was a mod decision probably to stop me from doing whatever you think I might be capable of. I would never harm EP or SROTD.
I did not evade the ban and the admins removed the suspension in less than an hour with an apology for the mistake. Nice try though.
That last one is really just laughable. Plans of further sabotage? I know that you struggle to understand humour, but when we all laugh at the stupidity of an idea, it's not meant to be taken seriously.
I regret the day I first considered you a friend. You stomped all over that in pretty short order.
[–]creesch[S] 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
It is interesting how in the bolded part you mention a few things that aren't relevant at all. One of the things would actually be of importance but considering you lumped it in with the few other relatively minor things I really wonder how much truth there is in it.
[–]unknown_nameYou get all my K's 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
This whole situation is getting watered down and away from the point of the thread really. We just need to have a vote on the appropriate day.
[–]creesch[S] 6 points7 points8 points  (1 child)
I guess so, though I am not sure what good a vote will do when the top mod of the biggest sfw sub clearly shows he has no interest in following any rules. Even rules he himself suggests.
[–]karmicviolence 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
I really hope he comes to his senses. This is not the jax I remember :(
[–]Lurlur 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
My actions got worse? I had never done anything to EP and hadn't escalated anything anywhere else.
The EP removal stank like the actions of a vindictive ex-boyfriend who couldn't accept the break up.
[–]creesch[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (4 children)
  1. Notified or consulted? I know that kjones probably said something along the lines of talking to others.
  2. Is there? Also isn't this what brainstorm threads are about? Consolidate or challenge precedent.
  3. Because this worked really well and will not result in exactly the same thing?
[–]jaxspiderGreenPowerRanger 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
  1. Is there a difference? I don't play word games. Or politics. There is no difference for me.
  2. From what others have told me, there was. And you're doing just that aren't you?
  3. Thats you're opinion and you have a right to have it.
[–]creesch[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (2 children)
  1. I think there is a difference and really didn't intend to play word games. You are the one doing politics and have done so routinely in the past.
  2. Alrighty then. When?
  3. Much appreciated "that is... Like... Your opinion man!".
[–]jaxspiderGreenPowerRanger 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
  1. Well there isn't.
    • Please give examples since this is new to me.
  2. When what? Aren't you doing exactly what you asked... in this thread?
  3. I don't know how else to answer you. I tried to acknowledge your opinion neutrally.
[–]creesch[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
1:
Notified = "hey I am going to do this regardless of your input".
Consulted = "hey, I am thinking of doing this. What are your thoughts on it?"
I am not sure why the difference is hard to grasp for you.
2:
When did this happen before, can you elaborate on the circumstances.
3:
How else do you expect me to respond to a non statement like that?
It is funny how you have been nothing but evasive about giving straight honest answers yet claim you don't do politics.
[–]Lurlur 3 points4 points5 points  (4 children)
Not exactly an unbiased observer here. As a sfw network mod, yeah, I think this needs addressing. Mod positions shouldn't be given and taken away like favours from a dictator.
[–]noeatnosleep 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
While I agree with you completely about what should happen....
Subreddits are literally dictatorships.
[–]Lurlur 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
I know :( The network is supposed to be different though.
[–]karmicviolence 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
This network is different than the rest of reddit.
[–]noeatnosleep 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Is it? A top mod just nuked someone because he didn't like what she said in another subreddit.
[–]MillenniumFalc0n 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
As a general rule, no I don't believe top mods should make unilateral decisions. It undermines the framework (i.e. the team) managing and supporting the subreddit.
[–]agentlameVerified Big Oil Shill 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
They aren't supposed to, but I guess soupy supported it?
[–]creesch[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
That still doesn't make it a sizeable percentage. In fact with soupy supporting that makes it still one actual active mod supporting it.
[–]Jaraxo 1 point2 points3 points  (5 children)
Not sure what system I'd like, but it should probably never be down to one person alone.
[–]creesch[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
Edit: I done goofed.
[–]Jaraxo 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
edit: You didn't see a thing...
[–]noeatnosleep 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
Wrong username. I blame autocorrect.
[–]Gagetliterally the worst mod ever seen in the history of reddit 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
We need a vote system. This is what I think the process should be:
Mod A has a serious problem with Mod B.
Mod A should make a thread in the private backroom subreddit /r/SFWpornmods to discuss the issue. All evidence of wrongdoing by Mod B should be placed in the thread, and the subreddits that the mod deserves to be removed from. There should probably be at least 48 hours of discussion. Mod B should have the opportunity to defend themselves. Then there should be a separate thread for voting whether to remove or not. No discussion in the second thread -- just votes. Probably two days for that as well. Mod B probably shouldn't get a vote. Only moderators of the subreddits they're potentially getting removed from should be able to vote.
If you're worried about them causing problems in the subs you're going to remove them from, you can remove their mod perms while this process happens.
Also, I think removing another active moderator without following this process should immediately subject you to this process.
[–]Br00ce 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Wasnt there a rule made about this when /u/soupyhands removed /u/karmicviolence?
[–]ZadocPaet 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
I just saw the notification for this brainstorming thread.
I want to add that I saw a lot of what LurLur was doing to jaxspider first hand. It was straight up harassment. She was posting pastebins of his comments in IRC to reddit, to modmail, and via PM, plus a lot over other nastiness.
I am not going to get into great detail (because doxxing), but IMO it was beyond what reddit policy allows. I'll leave it at that. If I were in the same position as jax, I wouldn't want someone on my mod team who had gone scorched earth like that on me. In fact, had it been me, I would've taken it a step further and gone to the admins with it.
[–]cupcake1713 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
I will admit that I have not seen the pastebins so I don't know 100% what was in there, but as others have mentioned in this thread it's not actually a violation of any rules to post conversations in pastebin. It's the internet and realistically nothing is private, so if people don't want what they say to be repeated elsewhere it makes the most sense to just not say anything on the internet.
[–]ZadocPaet 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
It's the behavior, which was harassing. It was straight up SomeGuyFromCanada level stuff.
But I also understood in another one his name was used.
[–]Lurlur 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
It's not harassment to use logs from a public channel as a way of showing concerned parties what their head mod really thinks.
And there was no doxxing.
Someone did go to the admins though, didn't they. Over some ban evasion? Guess that didn't stick, just like the other mud you're throwing.
[–]josh6499 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
Yes they should, if a junior mod is being a dumbass, get them out. Take their coats.
[–]creesch[S] 3 points4 points5 points  (2 children)
Funny, that is not how the sfw network has operated in the past. Things like that used to be team decisions. I can only think of one instance where immediate action was taken by a top mod and even then it was after consulting a good few people.
[–]josh6499 -1 points0 points1 point  (1 child)
So vote on it now. He said it was a preventative measure. If you guys vote to let her back in, I'm sure jax would aquiesce. A top mod should be able to make tough time sensitive decisions on short notice though, they can always discuss it later and reverse the decision if necessary.
So I guess I agree that there should be a vote on actually removing a mod. Jax probably should have simply removed her mod priveleges and then started a discussion about it with the other mods.
[–]unknown_nameYou get all my K's 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
So vote on it now. He said it was a preventative measure. If you guys vote to let her back in, I'm sure jax would aquiesce.
Yeahhhhh...we tried that and it was gunned down mid-vote.
[–][deleted]  (2 children)
[deleted]
    [–]unknown_nameYou get all my K's 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
    /u/Jaraxo is not the mod in question in the screenshot.
    There's a heirarchy for a reason, we shouldn't have to assemble everyone for a vote on every little thing. Also, there's literally no way to enforce this, the top mod can do whatever they please
    No, this is the exact opposite of any SFWporn subreddit. Top mods are not supposed to make unilateral decisions. Hence the voting process for every rule change and everything else.
    [–]randoh12 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
    It really comes down to two factors. Vote off or allow the top mod to veto votes.
    The choice to vote a mod off the team should come with a vote but sometimes the top mod or top two may have to veto in the best interests of the sub.
    Seeing lurlur's and jaxspider's responses here seem....weird. There is some petty mud slinging going on, and regardless of the details...if she revealed his first name...she broke a major rule. That was completely unnecessary. How can she be trusted to not reveal other private details?
    [–]Gagetliterally the worst mod ever seen in the history of reddit 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
    Apparently his first name was common knowledge among the SROTD modteam, so that's not doxx.
    [–]randoh12 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
    But, was it shared outside of there? Did she get explicit permission to do so or share it anywhere?
    It is not a question for me of whether it was doxxing or not but rather whether she revealed something private in order to cause shit. That is an ethics violation and breach of trust...a major rule violation between mod teams.
    [–]Lurlur 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Outside of the private backroom sub, his name has not been shared and nor would I share it.
    [–]randoh12 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Thanks! I do not know the story, and I appreciate you clarifying.
    [–]TheRedditPope 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Commenting to say that I've read this post and the subsequent discussion but am ambivalent about it in general.
    [–][deleted]  (26 children)
    [removed]
      [–]unknown_nameYou get all my K's[M] 2 points3 points4 points  (25 children)
      I've removed your comment. It's not relevant to this thread and really, posting it was completely unnecessary.
      Edit: editing your comment will not make it visible...
      [–]creesch[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (13 children)
      I had a reply ready for him that was on topic. So I'll just reply to you if that is ok?
      Bring it up and when it turns out to be true there should be no problem getting the percentage I mentioned.
      [–]Br00ce 0 points1 point2 points  (12 children)
      self admitted irc logs aren't enough evidence for it to be "true"?
      [–]creesch[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (11 children)
      I don't know the context, for all I know she mentioned his name in a backroom. Considering her account is still here...
      [–]Br00ce 0 points1 point2 points  (10 children)
      someone has to report her for admins to do anything and seeing how they didnt ban /u/agentlames doxxers you and I both know they arent super reliable about it.
      but seeing how it pissed jax off to remove her from 2 subreddits I would say it was more than just a casual mentioning of his name
      [–]Respectfullyyours 2 points3 points4 points  (8 children)
      Just to clarify as someone who was in the SROTD thread, it was just his first name.
      [–]unknown_nameYou get all my K's 4 points5 points6 points  (7 children)
      Unless his name is the most unique name in the freaking world, that is not doxxing. Maybe upsetting at most, but not doxxing.
      [–]noeatnosleep 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      It wasn't doxxing, agreed. She literally just called him by his first name, which in the back room we all already knew, as he had used it himself.
      This is a smear campaign against Lurlur because she got aggressive about Jax destroying a subreddit that we build while he was away for nine months.
      She got aggressive and challenged him and he removed her from subreddits unrelated the conflict and is now waging a PR campaign against her widely known good conduct and productive influence.
      [–]ZadocPaet 0 points1 point2 points  (5 children)
      I feel like I recall an issue in Century Club about a year ago where admins got involved because a user was suddenly not okay with people using his first name in posts on the sub.
      So, as far as I know, the admins do consider sharing a person's first name to be doxxing, even if they themselves have previously posted it on reddit. At least that's how it used to work.
      [–]Lurlur 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      I've checked with admins. What happened was not doxxing and they would not take action against me.
      [–]creesch[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
      Did you just make that up? Because that is never how I saw admins dealing with it.
      [–][deleted]  (2 children)
      [removed]
        [–][deleted]  (1 child)
        [removed]
          [–]Br00ce 0 points1 point2 points  (7 children)
          how is it not? wasnt /u/someguyfromcanada unilaterally removed for similar things?
          [–]agentlameVerified Big Oil Shill 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
          Nope. SGFC was sbanned by the admins for harassment. His new account (/u/YouGross) was added to EP after the banning. Then he used that account to harass the same person and it was banned. At that point it was clear that we shouldn't readmit his (now also sbanned) account.
          [–]davidreiss666 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
          I don't really want to open up that can of worms, but I was at least somewhat involved in the someguy situation. I know that he was not removed unilaterally. There was a lot of discussion leading up to that, in and outside of the SFW-porn subreddits.
          In the end it was the admins who shadow banned him for breaking at least one of the major base rules of Reddit.
          [–][deleted]  (4 children)
          [removed]
            [–][deleted]  (3 children)
            [removed]
              [–][deleted]  (1 child)
              [removed]
                Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2016 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
                REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
                π Rendered by PID 31410 on app-367 at 2016-04-19 13:51:51.898242+00:00 running 4331ca6 country code: NL.
                Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
                0%
                 
                10%
                 
                20%
                 
                30%
                 
                40%
                 
                50%
                 
                60%
                 
                70%
                 
                80%
                 
                90%
                 
                100%