On the banning of Lapis Lazuli

[Ex-User (5841)]

This is actually the best discussion I've had here in a while, derail be damned.

The thing is, it's not always detrimental to A, A just perceives it as potentially detrimental and doesn't want to enter what appears to be a zero sum game at best. All the risk is on B the whole time. Paradoxically B seems to be aware of this more often than A (which seems to repeat regardless of A's identity, which fascinates me).

This stuff too: "some other parties or people would feel offended, or lash out in defence at this point, or even hate you for what you've just done, at least in my experience."

Realistically, someday either Kuu or LoR will get tired of my bullshit, drop the hammer on me, and declare me one of those problematic users who had to be banned for the greater good. But that probably won't be today.

 

[Black Rose]

Realistically, someday either Kuu or LoR will get tired of my bullshit, drop the hammer on me, and declare me one of those problematic users who had to be banned for the greater good. But that probably won't be today.

so your attachment to this topic "is" about Lapis Lazuli because you perceive him to be someone you might have a commonality with. Hmm.. do you believe that others think of you as a trouble maker because of themselves? someone said Lapis Lazuli was acting like a banned member and I can now see that feeling / vibe from him even if he wasn't. Do we want people here who act like banned members trying to be cautious. this seem like da blob also. I think you are very open TheHabitatDoctor. people who are open are the people you want in a community. when people try to hide then motives might be something to question. can we detect those subtleties?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

idk. I never felt any attachment to Lapis, I've just accepted my inevitable banning. It's shifted the game into seeing how far I can push the envelope over what amount of time. So I'm basically countering your statement by stating my intentionality, which should ironically serve a purpose to highlight to others exactly where the boundary lies. I'm not sure subtleties can be detected, I'm just too accepting.

Montresor did have a grammar obsession.

Now I'm wondering how long it could be until the intentionality stated in this post is used against me.

 

[Black Rose]

anything that happened is because of an emotional reaction. you will not be banned for sticking up for yourself or others.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Never say never.

But really, we are actually derailing a bit. But then again this thread has probably already served its purpose so I don't particularly feel bad.

 

[computerhxr]

Embarrassingly, I have had a few times where I lost it on someone in the forum. Somehow, I flew under the banning radar.

I have an idea. Instead of banning, you have selective areas where the children can play. Then when they mature, they will be allowed to join the adults. The truly enlightened forum members would have their own area as well.

Since I'm throwing out ideas, I think INTPs should have their own seal so we can tell them apart. Look ma' I'm certified INTP! Yay!

 

[Black Rose]

Never say never.

But really, we are actually derailing a bit. But then again this thread has probably already served its purpose so I don't particularly feel bad.

that seemed like an intentional antagonism. also like not giving a fuck.(negative not positive)
when you are protecting yourself or others you do not attack people.

https://youtu.be/YFGBoSt1dOo

i think you care allot TheHabitatDoctor

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Funny, I selected all the 21 posts from this derail and was looking for appropriate threads to attach them to. Turns out most of the candidates already have derailed posts inside .

I guess I'll leave this derail discussion as it was, THD, all your posts are copied and kept safe in our (as well as NSA) files so don't bother editing , but you know that already.

Spoiler

idk. I never felt any attachment to Lapis, I've just accepted my inevitable banning. It's shifted the game into seeing how far I can push the envelope over what amount of time. So I'm basically countering your statement by stating my intentionality, which should ironically serve a purpose to highlight to others exactly where the boundary lies. I'm not sure subtleties can be detected, I'm just too accepting.

Montresor did have a grammar obsession.

Now I'm wondering how long it could be until the intentionality stated in this post is used against me.

This is actually the best discussion I've had here in a while, derail be damned.

If you ever feel like fanning the flames of drama again, you can always pm me instead, I can be your practice target for kicks.

The thing is, it's not always detrimental to A, A just perceives it as potentially detrimental and doesn't want to enter what appears to be a zero sum game at best. All the risk is on B the whole time. Paradoxically B seems to be aware of this more often than A (which seems to repeat regardless of A's identity, which fascinates me).

True, I just wanted to point out that there's a number of sensitive or unsuspecting people who don't take too kindly to such pushing, I wouldn't like it myself if I didn't feel secure or consider you friendly and neutrally-intentioned.

You know that and I'd politely ask you to respect and spare them, if you see it wouldn't do good for them in the long run.

Peace, have a wonderful day folks.

 

[TheAdditional1]

I can't read this entire thread, but I'm fascinated - where did this Lapis fellow comment? Curious what actually connotes a banning in this case.

 

[Sinny91]

@TheAdditional1 - Being misunderstood apparently.

 

[TheAdditional1]

Thanks - I'm particularly wondering where some of his threads are

 

[TheAdditional1]

Ah nevermind, nevermind; I am new to this site, and in comparison to you all's masterful navigations, I am but a babe.

But the babe doth groweth, and I have now figured out how to look up a user's post history; the babe is now, I believe, a proud and teetering toddler.


---

But no I checked out a few of Lapis Lazuli's posts. He's apparently a well-read guy with complex thoughts and mildly uninhibited social awareness - I would assume either his English teachers never made him clarify his writing more concisely, or they praised him and put him ahead of his years without pausing to teach him the layman's verse.

He also discusses the edges of somewhat abrasive, mildly controversial topics very freely without regards to social awareness; he has a lowered sense of mediation. When you freely and discuss edgy topics at your own pace, which happens to be faster and more complex (possibly only because you've studied it more in your spare time), and leave it fraught with intellectual references and technical terms, you can wear your humanity too thin and leave some people bemused and put off. Sometimes you need to be very very objective to address the finer nuances of thought, and that can come off as simply insensitive - the same way a surgeon might appear to be cutting flesh very roughly; simply a pragmatist, not an artist.

And now add the subtle humor that Lapis Lazuli has - freely transitioning from intellectual discussion to simple facetiousness and back again, as well as subtle ah...mid-to-high brow sarcasm, and I can see how it might be more abrasive in the long term. It can't be taken personally...between various factors of intellectual circles and social circles (either way) some people do appreciate his type of humor and discourse, others don't.

The most indicative factor in all of this is his earnest involvement in the discussions, regardless of his behavior; he is truly invested in these conversations. I myself came here for some type of intellectual solace, and I would hate to be deprived of such a forum on account of a dearth of social awareness.


I haven't been around long but I'd personally like to vote this dude back.


+1

 

[Grayman]

Mods, what were the nature of the complaints from various users about Lapis?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Mods, what were the nature of the complaints from various users about Lapis?

Spoiler

I do still feel evil sometimes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXiifFBHj5g

On the bright side, at least I'm discussing the OP now.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Spoiler

I do still feel evil sometimes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXiifFBHj5g

On the bright side, at least I'm discussing the OP now.

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQLvfvIA8Wk

 

[dark+matters]

Thanks - I'm particularly wondering where some of his threads are

I don't think that the moderators owe anyone an explanation (I seem to remember that as part of the rules when I first signed up, but I can't find those rules now), so I question my taste in feeding another one of these kinds of threads. But I wanted to point out that a lot of harassment isn't going to be detectable by a simple post search.

I've received personal attacks in more fluid forms, like well-timed attacks in signature lines and in headlines. Harassment could also come in the form of well-timed posts elsewhere on the forum or changes in profile pictures. I could also see someone's posting harassing messages on other sites as a potential way to harass. I also looked through the banned user's past posts and didn't see anything, but even if there weren't any explicitly obnoxious posts in private messages either, that doesn't really tell us whether or not someone was being personally targeted by that individual.

We have to put aside the fears a banning might trigger about being abandoned or rejected and trust that the moderators are doing their function, and that we can always go elsewhere if we have too many objections. The consequences of being banned on one of an infinite number of anonymous internet groups are minimal. If we don't put aside those fears, we could risk losing our cool and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy for ourselves. This latter part about possible personal motivations is just my opinion. I have no desire to take a jab at anyone who disapproves of the banning process by this last paragraph and hope it doesn't come across that way. Of course, banning decisions are a debatable subject like anything else. Personally, I like that most forums don't even bother bringing it up. It's like those videos of celebrities reading mean Tweets. After a while, I don't see the point.

 

[RicBC]

Can we have a sample of what he posted that might have led him to be banned?

I only saw his posts once so I have no reference to reasons that migh be behind this notable and rare "event".

 

[Grayman]

Can we have a sample of what he posted that might have led him to be banned?

I only saw his posts once so I have no reference to reasons that migh be behind this notable and rare "event".

...It isn't a post that is the issue. It is an overall impression he made.

 

[Sinny91]

Why is your 'event' written as "event" RicBC?

 

[RicBC]

...It isn't a post that is the issue. It is an overall impression he made.

yeah i missed that impression... i thought that someone might have fresh examples in memory about it and dare sharing

Why is your 'event' written as "event" RicBC?

it is something that i think is out of the ordinary and usefull, but again i missed all the action as i just stated to Grayman.

Edit:nevermind my request....
I was reading the forum using tapatalk and with its limited functionality, I skipped reading posts that actually answer my request.