Yeah because the mods made a mistake a while ago they should make another one now.
Bitch you better be trolling right now cause this is laughable, it's like if you accidentally ran over some dude in a brown trenchcoat with your car you should thereafter run over all dudes wearing brown trenchcoats because consistency=morality.
Indeed, I would clarify that the only person from that time who is still a mod here now is LoR and she hasn't even had any input on these bans. It's an odd case to compare to, really. My impression was that he was allowed to stay if he kept to that account, basically as a ceasefire for the endless trouble he was making with dupe accounts. I'd be surprised if many mods had much "favour" for him at the time.
What I'm saying is, should I take you seriously and clarify things in a serious manner, or should I not take you seriously as you once told me not to and just see you as someone who likes ruffling feathers and being a contrarian?
The whole Lyra thing was only to disprove a statement made by Polaris. I was purposefully being pedantic to see how much rhubarb would be generated: "Lyra is an exception, but also not really an exception". It took a while to get to the truth.
If people care so much about being banned, why do they only seem to care after that fact? Why do they not care about getting warned and cautioned? Why do they not care about whether how they conduct themselves will get them banned? Why do they think they're deserving of pardon? Why do they think it's their God given, unalienable right to be in a privately owned space?
To be on topic, here's wonka as an example. He registered several duplicate accounts after being banned yet he made a point that he didn't care about being banned and ignored all warnings he was given and refused to modify his behavior.
Is it just an ego thing, as in "you dared to ban me, so I'm going to come back as an act of spite or w/o". Do they genuinely care about remaining in the community? If they do care why didn't they cooperate before?
Indeed, I would clarify that the only person from that time who is still a mod here now is LoR and she hasn't even had any input on these bans. It's an odd case to compare to, really. My impression was that he was allowed to stay if he kept to that account, basically as a ceasefire for the endless trouble he was making with dupe accounts. I'd be surprised if many mods had much "favour" for him at the time.
If my memory serves, the forum had to be closed for registrations because of the influx of alternate accounts and the widespread hysteric paranoia that ensued amongst the membership that resulted in some hostile attitudes towards the newbies. It was a compromise, a lesser of two evils if you will.
If people care so much about being banned, why do they only seem to care after that fact? Why do they not care about getting warned and cautioned? Why do they not care about whether how they conduct themselves will get them banned? Why do they think they're deserving of pardon? Why do they think it's their God given, unalienable right to be in a privately owned space?
To be on topic, here's wonka as an example. He registered several duplicate accounts after being banned yet he made a point that he didn't care about being banned and ignored all warnings he was given and refused to modify his behavior.
Is it just an ego thing, as in "you dared to ban me, so I'm going to come back as an act of spite or w/o". Do they genuinely care about remaining in the community? If they do care why didn't they cooperate before?
If my memory serves, the forum had to be closed for registrations because of the influx of alternate accounts and the widespread hysteric paranoia that ensued amongst the membership that resulted in some hostile attitudes towards the newbies. It was a compromise, a lesser of two evils if you will.
For some it's an ego thing, for others it's a form of entertainment. There are some who simply feel compelled to troll. You'd be surprised at how many reasons there are for trolling. It's not always to piss people off. In fact, some of them aren't even trolling intentionally, they're just socially inept.
It's like those hyperactive kids at school you just wanted to shut the hell up for 5 minutes; they can't help it.
The latter. I don't particularly care about what's going on as I mentioned in the same post you quoted:
The whole Lyra thing was only to disprove a statement made by Polaris. I was purposefully being pedantic to see how much rhubarb would be generated: "Lyra is an exception, but also not really an exception". It took a while to get to the truth.
The "rhubarb" you are talking about is simply the process of finding out what actually happened. I never thought to dig in the archives about Lyra until you questioned my reply, which, as I explained in the chatbox, was a statement based on the current moderator team methods. I repeat: I cannot speak for the past. Now that I have read through the mod archives concerning this case, I could see that you had a point. However, calling this cliquishness or favouritism is probably not as much the case as being a highly pragmatic solution at the time. It actually shows the thought and effort that mods put into assessment of members considered to be a problem.
If you need further clarification, do not hesitate to ask.
If this is merely entertainment, I will probably be less inclined to regard you with any seriousness though.
Could you please clarify on how what I have done in this thread is trolling.
Not particularly caring and trolling are not the same thing.
You are implying that what I was saying was without merit. I made a valid point and it was addressed.
Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterise a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation.
If people care so much about being banned, why do they only seem to care after that fact? Why do they not care about getting warned and cautioned? Why do they not care about whether how they conduct themselves will get them banned? Why do they think they're deserving of pardon? Why do they think it's their God given, unalienable right to be in a privately owned space?
I think I may have misread your post. What I said below applies to those who view the ban, not what the banned person thinks. Anyone who does not heed formal warnings isn't listening.
I thought I had nothing more to say on this thread, but your Q is of value I think. I would like to see banning people treated as in real life ostracism. Do it something like this order:
1. As a mod tell them you don't like what they're doing. Tell them they are on the line. The may want to argue some point.
2. Accept or reject that point. Do this publicly so others get the message.
3. Once you've made a decision they are out of line, warn them.
4. Tell them how serious it is: perma, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, etc.
5. Depending on how serious it is, give them more time to correct themselves but continue to warn.
6. If they defy, act.
Those are just my off-the-cuff thoughts, not gospel. The idea is you talk to them as if they were adults. Maybe they will "agree to disagree" and accept a ban. Skip any of those steps as needed.
You asked about "caring after the fact." I think that happens when it's a surprise to the public. Maybe sometimes you do the warning via PMs. What about making it public, depending on what's happening? As an example this morning I skimmed and saw a couple ad hominems. This person was not criticized. It looked to me he was let go. I would have wanted to say something if I were there. Of course if I did, it's hard to say how it would be taken: "Avoid calling names. Do you see you did?" Well I'm not a mod. I see that as a good mod tactic. It can be said tactfully. As it is no one noticed (I'm not 100% sure). Now what if he saw he was getting away with it and repeated the name calling? What if eventually he got banned? Then I might want to speak up and say, "Why ban this guy if he wasn't told something until it got real bad? On the other hand maybe mods don't want to hold hands and spend time on minor stuff. I'm just answering your Q about why people don't speak up until they see a perma-ban.
If this is true he understands people so why would he have fundamentalism as an option. Or I am really INFJ and he is something else. I'm not saying my personality is set so my identification with INFJ and we are different people. Why would they become fundamentalist? That's being collectivist instead of an individual like Jesus was.
I think the rules are twisted and exploited on those whom certain people like or dislike: cliquishness
This would explain why Lyra was never banned and why Goku was conveniently banned for being NinjaSurfer. It was a weak excuse in my eyes (although not surprising).
If someone repeatedly demonstrates their ability to use proxies and drown madmin in alts while said alts are being repeatedly banned in a perpetual game of whack-a-mole, it's easier to just let them have an account and hope they go away (which... worked. Though I personally want Lyra to return).
So basically NS isn't as smart as Lyra (whatever you want to make of that statement) and what Polaris said is accurate:
The mods at the time decided to let Lyra live and continue in his new persona as there were too many negative associations among the forum members with XIII.
So, I have been going back in the mod thread from that time to find out why they kept Lyra. It seems they got so tired of his prolific dupe account generation that they decided to keep the "best" persona: Lyra. Up to then, XIII had made dozens of dupes and wasn't about to stop.
If people care so much about being banned, why do they only seem to care after that fact? Why do they not care about getting warned and cautioned? Why do they not care about whether how they conduct themselves will get them banned? Why do they think they're deserving of pardon? Why do they think it's their God given, unalienable right to be in a privately owned space?
To be on topic, here's wonka as an example. He registered several duplicate accounts after being banned yet he made a point that he didn't care about being banned and ignored all warnings he was given and refused to modify his behavior.
Is it just an ego thing, as in "you dared to ban me, so I'm going to come back as an act of spite or w/o". Do they genuinely care about remaining in the community? If they do care why didn't they cooperate before?
Because warnings aren't always clear to the community, so it catches a decent portion of the community by surprise. Some forums have warning threads, others have ban petitions submitted by other users. And sometimes people's feathers aren't ruffled in the same way as madmin's.
And of course after someone's banned, dupes are made just to troll mods. Usually little more than that. A very, very select few may return after being banned because they've become attached to the community and their initial trolling was apparently just a phase. Like Coolydudey. And me. And well... a half dozen others I can't name.
Bring back The Void!!!
Wouldn't want him using his satanic powers on you...
What I'm saying is, should I take you seriously and clarify things in a serious manner, or should I not take you seriously as you once told me not to and just see you as someone who likes ruffling feathers and being a contrarian?
Just want to chime in once - you are right and you were right. You should also be able to see that the point she made was that any further engagement with the issue will be seen as trolling now that your official stance is explicit.
I think everyone should have Georgia on their mind. Away with Verdana, Aerial, Times Roman new or not! There's a newer font on the block, begging to be used and abused, and a progressive forum would respect that.
Attention all you banned posters and active posters who wish to be in that state. I will no longer be defending you unless you really really deserve it. Really deserving it will not be enough. You must really really deserved it. Been there; done that.
This does not apply to my past clients who will continue to be defended, deserving or not ... as long as you continue to pay your bills. This is not a pro bono service except for those who cannot afford it. You know who you are.
You're silly. I've ALWAYS got a choice. He is that which is bannned but not banned. You may think him banned but really he is bannnned. The bannnning is of his choosing.
Just wanted to let you know I'm really enjoying this thread.
A lot of what's being said about me is simply not true, but it's clear that most of you are unconcerned with facts, so I won't bother correcting you.
I do, however, want to point out that you banned "Happy Forever" on the INCORRECT ASSUMPTION that he/she was me. WAY TO GO!
But then again, he/she wouldn't have lasted long here anyway, since he/was a Muslim, and there's such an obvious anti-religion agenda here.
Anyway, that's all I have to say for now.
You've made it clear you don't want to hear any more preaching, so you won't hear any more from me.
The inevitability of what? What is the "it" that you accepted the inevitability of?
That you're pathetic? That you were destined to make a duplicate account?
So the physical reality where robots and transhumanism exist has nothing to do with the soul? Most people who are christian taking interest in technology think that the image of the beast will happen on earth.
I don't reject Jesus but "spiritual materialism" seem to be on my mind.
It's cute when people try to act like they don't care, yet still can't resist having the last word and go to the effort of evading bans to try and assert their moral/intellectual superiority over others.
wonkavision said:
A lot of what's being said about me is simply not true, but it's clear that most of you are unconcerned with facts, so I won't bother correcting you.
And yet you already have tried to, 'correct' people by stating that they were, 'simply not true'.
For someone who acted all tough like it didn't matter to them if they got banned, you sure hang around a lot to try and prove it after the fact...which ironically has the opposite effect on people's perception of you
He said it was pathetic that you want to seem casual and uncaring, but you had to resort to this duplicate account anyway. There is discrepancy.
Your reply doesn't address this at all. You said exactly this:
The inevitability of what? What is the "it" that you accepted the inevitability of?
That you're pathetic? That you were destined to make a duplicate account?
I accepted the inevitabilty of being banned. i wasnt acting tough or pretending not to care. i just accepted the fact that i was going to be banned if i continued to preach.
and i accept the fact that the mods are going to ban me again as soon as they get wind of this.
It has nothing to do with acting tough, its just accepting reality.
This site uses cookies to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. We have no personalisation nor analytics --- especially no Google.
And well... a half dozen others I can't name.
