Hard Candy
 

Wow........

Re: Hard Candy
 

how informative

Re: Hard Candy
 

watch it and you'll see what I mean.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Not sure whether I want to see this or not. I don't know the extent to which it could be classed as "horror" and I am a bit squeamish when it comes to blood and gore. But the plot itself sounds fascinating. IMDB 4tw KoS :)

Re: Hard Candy
 

It's a bit along the lines of Fatal Attraction, but with dark humor. I'm still questioning the ending.

Re: Hard Candy
 

yeah i don't know if there's any blood and gore at all. just tense... lots and lots of tense.

it's good. well worth watching.

Re: Hard Candy
 

look, sure I can find the info on IMDB, and I already saw the trailer. Just that if you're going to the trouble of posting a topic here about something, it would be nice if it actually had some information in it that one might react to.
So instead of just "wow" you might say something along the lines of "wow I think this movie was great because...." (preferably without spoilers too ;))

Otherwise we'll just be posting film titles as topics and skip the content altogether. I mean, everyone can just look it up on IMDB anyway right? :rolleyes:

sorry for the rant ;)

Re: Hard Candy
 

who pissed in your Cheerios this morning? :p

Re: Hard Candy
 

That's IT!!! I've HAD it with these motherfucking SNAKES on this motherfucking PLANE!!!!

Re: Hard Candy
 

lol.

Yeah, it's real trouble to post on here.. since when does every single post on here have to be informative? jOHN's post could of got other people talking, which is what discussion boards (or "forums") are used for.

Unless you're paying by the topic, please be stfu.

Re: Hard Candy
 

whatever man

Re: Hard Candy
 

I'm with KoS on this one. I've never heard of Hard Candy. Just because its in Treatment that means its the title of a film that I should check on IMDB?

Why dont we just create a thread for every film released but with no content in it? Attempting to say something about a movie and maybe providing the link to imdb and or trailer wouldnt be that much of an effort.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Yeah, ok, maybe you two can put this up as 'BOARD RULES' then.

Fuck. That.

Re: Hard Candy
 

luke rules. and you are all a bunch of fags.

Re: Hard Candy
 

careful eike, or I will post compromising pictures of you on the innernets :)

Luke, don't be a drama queen please.
Why is it that every time someone has something critical to say about the way some people post it's always like "oh where is the RULE then? Why don't you make it the new RULES blablabla" in some whiny "Help Help I'm being repressed!" kind of voice?

I'm just making a comment based on my own views. Stimpee is also just making a comment, no one is saying anything about RULES.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Gonna have to wade in here. You are a forum user, KoS, same as jOHN or Luke or me. Stimpee is the forum Moderator and as such has a "different" voice than anyone else here. Which means, rightly or wrongly, his posts can appear authoratative in nature, which is what has happened in this instance.

Not everything he posts is from a Mod's (authoratative) point of view, obviously. That needs to be borne in mind. But also people need to have some inkling of whether he is talking as "Stimpee the Mod" or simply "Stimpee". Otherwise they will inevitably see comments like this as over-moderation.

Re: Hard Candy
 

just fyi, luke's first response was before Stimpee even posted in this thread.

Also, I'm sure that whenever Stimpee posts something from a moderator's perspective, he will makes this clear in the post. That some people choose to deliberately misinterpret his posts as being moderator commands all the time just to stir up some shit is their problem. There was absolutely nothing in his or my post that hinted at it being anything other than a personal opinion.
People are free to ignore it, I was just trying to explain what I thought the "problem" with the original post was. Now it's all turning into some kind of big deal that it was never intended to be.

Re: Hard Candy
 

like, wow.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Hard Candy: http://img.alibaba.com/photo/5007028...Hard_Candy.jpg

Re: Hard Candy
 

Luke's right. His panties are definitely not in a knot, because I know firsthand he goes commando.

I think people can post as informatively or not as they'd like. Seriously, I have no problem with seeing the name of a movie and the comment wow. I've got a google search window a freaking inch away.

If someone wants to make posts like this, they bear the consequences. The consequences are that i make an interpretation on the post based on what I know of the poster. If someone whose taste I respect did a similar post, I'd follow the link. If it's someone who I think is a twat, I won't. If it's someone I don't know, it rather depends on my mood. Simple, innit? No harm, no foul. If someone repeatedly makes posts that everybody thinks are uninteresting, they'll stop replying, and the poster will probably figure out on his own that there's an issue he needs to address if he wants to be an active part of the community.

No hostility towards KoS, I don't want to escalate any bad mood here, but I think you're flat out wrong about people deliberately misinterpreting Stimpee. As a moderator, all his posts carry the weight of his authority, and if he doesn't like that, he doesn't need to be a moderator, or he should make another account for his opinion pieces. He's been throwing a lot of criticism around about people's posting habits, and, with his ability to merge threads and all that, backing up his criticism. He's posted in a thread of mine that he sort of kind of thought it should be deleted just because it was a joke - (True Romance 2) I thought it was a good (well, mediocre, fine) joke though. Granted, he didn't delete the thread.

He also has been openly scornful of people not using the search engine to find threads, and in some of these cases these were older threads by several months. That's a different idea of what dirty should be than I have. He wants a concise source of useful information and opinion; I expect more of an open dialogue type of feel that free posting encourages. Usually, when new threads are started on old topics, if previously interested parties are still kicking about, they link to the old threads anyway. It seems to sort itself out to me without the need of an authoritive hand.

Stimpee, whether he likes it or not, cannot separate his dirty member voice from his dirty moderator voice. Even if he explicitly stated he was presenting his view as a dirty member, in a particular post, I still think it would be questionable whether or not that should be taken at face value. Not saying he's dishonest, but I'm saying the situation makes it more complicated than his stated or chosen intent.

Re: Hard Candy
 

...and Hard Candy is a good movie.

Re: Hard Candy
 

ok, thats all well and good but you still have to make the search yourself to find out what it is. One word posting is just bad netiquette.not really. if its a movie you dont know and in a thread made by someone you dont know, youre not gonna check it out. if its a thread by someone you dont know then why even bother opening it? and how do you get to know these people and trust their tastes in the first place?

My criticism of posting habits is all common forum netiquette. Asking people to search the forums before posting and asking people to post more than one word are written rules in 99% of forums that have rules laid down. Use that google search window that youve got a freaking inch away if you dont believe me. No hostility towards KoS but there is obviously hostility towards me for backing him up. Take a chill pill and relax.

Oh and by the way for others, this is the "true romance 2" thread, and my response is clearly a joke.

I was agreeing with KoS, I wasn't dictating anything to anyone, just simply putting across a point of view. Sometimes people take things the wrong way, which is what seems to have happened here. Yes, there may be times when I moderate more than previous mods here would but thats still far less than on most forums out there. But I'm not gonna get into personal insults or criticism. This is how I am. I have strong opinions sometimes but I dont abuse my status.

Now, this thread isnt about me its about.. well I dont know. some "wow......" movie, so lets talk about that instead.

Re: Hard Candy
 

I AM THE MASTER OF MY DOMAIN!

Just look at the discussion I've started with just one word.

j/k kidding, I'm not that big headed. Well, kinda sorta in a different way maybe.

Re: Hard Candy
 

And you call me attention-seeking! Pah! :p

Re: Hard Candy
 

"No hostility towards KoS but there is obviously hostility towards me for backing him up. "

You need to take some of your own chill pill advice, Stimp. I tried to make it clear that our difference of opinions on how dirty should be moderated was a difference of objectives, and subjective. I thought I had succeeded in expressing this clearly and tactfully when I said, "That's a different idea of what dirty should be than I have. He wants a concise source of useful information and opinion; I expect more of an open dialogue type of feel that free posting encourages."

And, for the record, with regards to your True Romance 2 reply, I don't think it was as "clearly" a joke as you do. I took it to mean, "I find this moderately funny so I'll allow it but I don't really think threads about movies that don't exist/joke threads should be allowed/encouraged." I get that you saw the humour of it, granted, but I don't get, "I should lock this," at all. And I think if you believe you can make statements as a moderator like, "I should lock this," and have that clearly be perceived as a joke, you need to rethink how others are going to interpret your statements. I just don't think that's practical.

I think that's a natural mistake people make when writing emails and posting in forums. They read their own messages with the tone with which it was intended, and don't see how that tone isn't clear to other readers. Lord knows I've made that mistake too many times myself, this thread apparently being a great and relevant example.

Bullshit on "you don't get into personal insults or criticism." "Take a chill pill and relax," is exactly that, in a mildly passive-aggressive disguise.

And, again, we have you "suggesting" that we redirect a thread that has gone off on a tangent. I think this again comes back to the notion of differing ideas on what the forums should and should not be. I think that probably a fair portion of the threads that I've found most interesting over my years at dirty have been tangental in nature, with regards to their posted themes. I now think we had the capacity to get into an interesting discussion on moderation, but that doesn't fit your idea of proper netiquette.

We disagree. I guess that's okay, and your opinion certainly has more weight around here than mine. But if you're going to chastise people every time they post without searching, point out every time someone breaks your rules of posting, which aren't rules per se but you'll still point 'em out cuz that's the rules on 99% of forums and they should know better, and redirect every thread that strays off topic, don't pretend you're not flexing your moderator muscles.

I came to your defense when simon was getting pissed off at you, I believe. I have no vendetta here, and I'm not angry.

Re: Hard Candy
 

First of all - Props to Eike. Word to ya, mother.

My posts came not from moderator induced repression. Granted, I do not want to have a moderator stick waved at me every time I post, but to have someone (other than a moderator) let another poster he has wasted that persons time and given hints on how next time not to do so - yeah, well that pisses me off.
I mean, is it critical for YOU (or anyone else for that matter) to point it out to anyone you don't like the way they post? I'd never seen it happen before, but if there was some broo-ha-ha kicked up then, I'm sorry I missed the boat. In fact, saying that it's happened before just reinforces my comments here.

Unfortunately, I feel airing this particular personal opinion and having Stimpee's 'authoritive' backing could have negative effects on the way people would post on the board.

I for one feel I am well past the age to be told when I am out of line on how to ACT ON THE INTERNET. And I will post, read and ignore anything that is not to the extreme of abuse without the need for moderator intervention as I always have.

Who'd of thought jOHN, on the 10 character limit, could start a discussion ON a discussion board?! Beyond me! Really!

BTW - I haven't seen 'Hard Candy' but my brother says it's cool. I reckon I'll get it some day soon after I watch this ream of 'Lost' Episodes.

Re: Hard Candy
 

I fucking rule, huh.

edit:

I agree with adam, to a certain extent. I often find stimpee's posts to be a little bit authoritarian, but he's a mod and he has that right. I tend to envision dirty as adam describes it, an open dialogue, and I moderate it accordingly (re: very, very little). Stimpee was given his role for a reason, and I would imagine if he was going against the grain too much he'd be booted - and he hasn't been.

Also, I imagine Scott will say "LOLSTFU" if he ever sees this thread.

THE INTERNETS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS!

Re: Hard Candy
 

As I said before I'm not ordering anyone to do anything and not telling anyone how to act. I was merely making requests for more informative posts. I've never edited people's posts, deleted people's posts and the one thread I have locked last year was unlocked about 3 hours later. I don't call that authoritarian. Is it really that out of line for me to make the suggestion that we follow some common forum netiquette? If so then I'll FOAD and you guys can do what the hell you like.

You guys want to keep having a go at me then go ahead but I won't be reading it.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Re: Hard Candy
 

Its out on DVD.

I feel inspired to watch it after this thread.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Usually if someone whose opinion I might value (pretty much anybody on this board) is speechless ("Wow........") from a movie - I'd be keen to check it out too.

Re: Hard Candy
 

so, if other people (like me) do have problem with it (and "problem" is really even too big a word for it, as I said earlier it was never as big a deal as it was made out to be) we're not allowed to say it? How do you rhyme that with your "people can post as they'd like"
As Stimpee has said, there is such a thing as netiquette. If people start posting in ALL CAPS ALL THE TIME, AM I NOT ALLOWED TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT??

look if you can take as a serious intent to lock the thread "just because it was a joke" than you are misinterpreting. Perhaps not deliberately, but still.
The :D kind of gives it away if you ask me.
To me it seemed that Lukes comments about "why not make it the BOARD RULES (in bold and in CAPS no less)" were at least deliberately inflammatory. Again, the only person who was mentioning RULES was Luke himself.

btw it's funny how you don't seem to take something like Tom's post in the stickie spoiler thread:

at the same "face value" as you seem to be taking Stimpee's posts. Surely the above quote is downright authoritarian! He didn't even use a smilie!!

well this is a matter of opinion. If something has been discussed before then I see no reason not to direct people to the search engine. Again this is common netiquette and on most every other forum if you start asking basic questions without using the search you will get some of the regular people kindly pointing it out to you. And that has nothing to do with restraining open dialogue either and everything to do with keeping the forum reasonably clean and uncluttered with needless double posting.

first of all, I never said that he had "wasted my time"
second, I would say it was mostly coinscidence rather than a critical situation. Coinscidence that I happened to click on this thread, happened to find only the word "wow" and happened to feel like that was a bit limited. So I made a comment (granted, with a bit of sarcasm, pehaps I should have used a ;)), then later explained myself in more detail after Janie pointed me to IMDB. It's not like I go trough the forums pointing out what problems I have with people's posts, because on the whole I don't really have a lot of problems with posts here.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Please get back on topic.

Re: Hard Candy
 

King of Snake loves New York, and has the t-shirt to prove it.

Re: Hard Candy
 

I will be a snake on a plane to new york to check it out for real sometime mr Rothausen. (I guess you already have an "I love Amsterdam" t-shirt? ;))

Re: Hard Candy
 

Back on topic:

When Hard Candy was playing at this brew pub cinema I work at these two women were freaked out by the film and spent the last hour or so of the taking turns going back into the film to see what was happening next.

They said it was too intense to sit in, but easier to stand in the back of the auditorium, a pint clutched in their hands, close to the exit when things got too intense for them, or when they needed a refill, which was often.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Uhuh. Thought so.

Think I will watch this from the safety of my sofa in that case. :D

Re: Hard Candy
 

You're largely right, KoS, but I think you're missing my point in certain respects. 1) Yes, apparently I misinterpreted Stimpee's post about locking the thread. That just indicates that his meaning isn't as clear as he thinks, which was a point I was trying to make. Also, even if he's %100 joking, for the joke to make any sense, it's implied that he thinks joke/nonsense threads merit locking. Not a big deal, my misinterpretation, but I think it illustrates that he has to be cautious about his moderation/non-moderation posting. Especially since he is establishing a pattern of criticizing people's posting habits sincerely.

2) You're right about the caps. I would fully endorse giving people shit about that. There are plenty of other posts, too, that I'd like to give people shit about, too, so I definitely think some criticism is warranted. I guess I thought your tone was harsher than the infringement warranted, but, again, granted, I may have totally misread your tone.

3) I interpret Tom's posts differently, true. That's because I know Tom a fair bit better, and am better able to interpret his tone.

Sorry for all the fuss...I didn't mean to bend everybody out of shape.

You're all a bunch of cunts.

Re: Hard Candy
 

Everyone here with any sense will gladly take that as a compliment.

CUNTS UNITE! (and nevermind the bollocks)

Re: Hard Candy
 

We're all cunts. Which is good. Adam is the biggest one ever - perhaps that's why I love him so.

p.s. if people start using ;) more I'll shoot them for being like the mongoose. that in itself is a criminal offence.