Moved: Conversation with wonkavision

[Goku]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

It's not relevant whether or not you can gauge it - the mods don't need your blessing every time someone is banned.

The forum is not a real world legal system or a democracy. If you don't like it...then fuck off

I am just responding in kind. But see, I foresaw that you would concede to the "If you don't like it... then fuck off" conclusion. That usually happens when one gets cornered by logic. If someone is going to reference an unseen text and use it as evidence in a logical debate, then I believe at the very least the text should be revealed. If not, then I don't see why the person responded in the first place.

 

[redbaron]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

You kind of blanket ad hom'd anyone who disagrees with you when you claimed that the only reason people disagree with you is because they're angry or hate you. Quite pathetic really.

If someone is going to reference an unseen text and use it as evidence in a logical debate, then I believe at the very least the text should be revealed.

Most of it isn't unseen, you just haven't been here long enough to have seen past exchanges between wonkavision and various moderators.

And no, there's really no reason to make the modbox public unless you support the idea that these issues should all be sorted out by the community at large and not a dedicated admin team.

But as stated, democracy is time-consuming and inefficient. It's unpaid and thankless work really, and for people who do care about the forum it would make the while thing rather unpleasant.

Plus, it just won't happen. You'll end up in Siberia or banned before it does. Not a threat, just that this pattern has repeated numerous times. Don't like it? Well, you know what comes next.

 

[Goku]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

You kind of blanket ad hom'd anyone who disagrees with you when you claimed that the only reason people disagree with you is because they're angry or hate you. Quite pathetic really.

Lol, no, there's another, more common, reason that people disagree with me-- they're wrong.

You disregard a very material fact here though-- I can both hold that belief (that the only reason people disagree with me is they're angry...) AND tackle your idea objectively/seriously. What you mention is not mutually exclusive. Ad hominem is independent from what you have described. I am pointing out the motivations for your behavior. But that doesn't prevent me from taking all your posts seriously.

 

[redbaron]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Lol, no, there's another, more common, reason that people disagree with me-- they're wrong.

Well that's original.

"I'm not wrong, everybody else is!"

You disregard a very material fact here though-- I can both hold that belief (that the only reason people disagree with me is they're angry...) AND tackle your idea objectively.

Maybe what you say is possible, but the lack of any objective argument on your behalf seems to indicate otherwise.

Oh by the way, the issue here is at heart, a conflict of morals. I find it amusing that you believe you can make an objective argument out of an inherently subjective issue...or that an objective argument in this case would necessarily imply its superiority.

 

[Cavallier]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Lol, no, there's another, more common, reason that people disagree with me-- they're wrong.

Interesting. If someone disagrees with you the conclusion you come to is that they are wrong.

I can both hold that belief (that the only reason people disagree with me is they're angry...) AND tackle your idea objectively/seriously.

You can't prove that. You can't prove that people only disagree with you because they are angry and you can't prove that you yourself are not angry...or should I say irritated?

 

[Goku]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Well that's original.

"I'm not wrong, everybody else is!"



Maybe what you say is possible, but the lack of any objective argument on your behalf seems to indicate otherwise.

Oh by the way, the issue here is at heart, a conflict of morals. I find it amusing that you believe you can make an objective argument out of an inherently subjective issue...or that an objective argument in this case would necessarily imply its superiority.

My use of "objective" in this instance was specifically in response to BG's exemplary ad hominem remark of not taking me seriously because it's me. That's fine, he/she can do that, but I personally receive that comment as an insult, because the vast majority of the time I feel like I'm being serious, even if my serious equals "fucking nutjob" to you, that is my perspective. So if you're going to tell me you're not going to take me seriously, then I'm just going to call your behavior what it is, childish.

 

[Goku]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Interesting. If someone disagrees with you the conclusion you come to is that they are wrong.

You can't prove that. You can't prove that people only disagree with you because they are angry and you can't prove that you yourself are not angry...or should I say irritated?

...yet, you should think about this, Cavallier... does "can't prove" necessarily equal "false" ... ? Sometimes strong intuition doesn't need proof.... sometimes. If I'm right, I'm right, If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. One or the other is true. I throw darts, some hit the bullseye, some don't.

And, I didn't say I'm always right, just most of the time I am.

 

[redbaron]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Yes, that's right! BG dismissed you because he's childish!

For someone who just claimed they don't resort to ad hominem, you sure resort to ad hominem a lot.

...yet, you should think about this, Cavallier... does "can't prove" necessarily equal "false" ... ? Sometimes strong intuition doesn't need proof.... sometimes. If I'm right, I'm right, If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. One or the other is true. I throw darts, some hit the bullseye, some don't

Nice strawman. Cavallier never claimed that, "can't prove" means false either

Also, if you really want to break this down with a bit more depth:

Claims presented without proof may be dismissed without proof just as readily. The fact that it's a strong intuition doesn't really mean anything either. Some people have strong intuition's that pokemon are actually real.

If you want to go around making baseless claims, that's fine - though you better learn to accept that you'll receive baseless rebuttals.

And, I didn't say I'm always right, just most of the time I am.

Well, cognitive dissonance is comforting at least.

 

[Goku]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Yes, that's right! BG dismissed you because he's childish!

For someone who just claimed they don't resort to ad hominem, you sure resort to ad hominem a lot.



Nice strawman. Cavallier never claimed that, "can't prove" means false either

Also, if you really want to break this down with a bit more depth:

Claims presented without proof may be dismissed without proof just as readily. The fact that it's a strong intuition doesn't really mean anything either. Some people have strong intuition's that pokemon are actually real.

If you want to go around making baseless claims, that's fine - though you better learn to accept that you'll receive baseless rebuttals.



Well, cognitive dissonance is comforting at least.

But, that is what (I believe) Cavallier intended to mean with her comment. Since you are not Cavallier, then you should not respond for Cavallier.

On that note, I do believe I can prove it, by the way (in some instances).

 

[redbaron]

And yet, proving people are angry does not imply that their statements are untrue - so it's really not that significant regardless.

Which makes me wonder why you keep pursuing this line of thinking. Have you not realised how unimportant it really is?

But, that is what (I believe) Cavallier intended to mean with her comment.

That's exactly what a strawman is you dolt - taking someone else's words and twisting them in such a way that you can make an argument against them, as opposed to arguing against them in their original form.

And I'm not speaking for Cav, just telling you what she didn't actually say.

 

[Cavallier]

...yet, you should think about this, Cavallier... does "can't prove" necessarily equal "false" ... ? Sometimes strong intuition doesn't need proof.... sometimes. If I'm right, I'm right, If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. One or the other is true. I throw darts, some hit the bullseye, some don't.

And, I didn't say I'm always right, just most of the time I am.

So, by that logic what you are saying is that all I need to back up my moderating decisions...is strong intuition?!?!

Oh god it's like Christmas came early!!!

 

[Goku]

And yet, proving people are angry does not imply that their statements are untrue - so it's really not that significant regardless.

Which makes me wonder why you keep pursuing this line of thinking. Have you not realised how unimportant it really is?

Yes that's a good point. But I think that peoples' emotional states, and their awareness of them (or unawareness) is more important than the validity of their arguments.

I doubt it makes you wonder that much since you seem to suffer from the same ailment.

 

[redbaron]

Yes that's a good point. But I think that peoples' emotional states, and their awareness of them (or unawareness) is more important than the validity of their arguments.

Well, that certainly explains your consistent moronicism.

 

[Goku]

So, by that logic what you are saying is that all I need to back up my moderating decisions...is strong intuition?!?!

Oh god it's like Christmas came early!!!

That could be what I am suggesting. It depends on how you see your position though. As a forum member, I don't have many responsibilities, as you do. My opinions are opinions. I am not making decisions. You, on the other hand, are making decisions. If I were, however, making decisions that potentially can have disastrous emotional effects on people, I might be more thoughtful in taking those actions. Opinions, on the other hand, don't really carry the same weight. A forum ban, specifically, should not be treated lightly.

What I am doing is sharpening a skill that I already know that I have. You, on the other hand, have a function to perform. If you think your intuition is that sharp, and it very well could be, then I would agree that maybe all you need is your intuition. Intuition is just a fancy way of saying "subconscious logic" anyways. It's just logic that you don't consciously realize yet. If you analyze your intuition, you can usually find the chain of logic that helped you arrive at the intuitive decision.

I know you were making a sarcastic remark, but I still always respond seriously.

 

[Jennywocky]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

you're the one tuning in every day, I am just one of the many executive producers of this show. You obviously have some opinions on this matter which are not exactly diametrically opposed to mine, but enough that both sides feel the need to keep responding. There is some synthesis occurring even though it may not feel like it.

Maybe my problem is that I see irony and humor everywhere, whereas others see threats and irritants.

Well, please don't put yourself on a pedestal. I also see irony and humor everywhere, but we just happen to disagree on the degree of this topic.

See, another humorous analogy that pops into mind, is that you guys invited a Jehova's witness into your house, then got surprised when he started doing what they do, then you booted him in the ass and said "get the fuck out" when you knew exactly what was going to happen when he joined. My opinion is that you are the idiots who let him in, in the first place... okay well I can be more fair to the analogy. It's more like some crazy jehova's witness running around in a public park, chasing the adults around and telling everyone they're going to hell. So somebody calls the cops on him. But, he asserts his right to free speech, but the cops go Rodney King on him anyways.

I think it's a lousy analogy, which is what frustrates me with you. You seem to set up these analogies just to be contrary (as they don't make sense), it actually comes off more like you just like the attention of debate. it invigorates you in some way to take this unique perspective purposefully chosen to be different, and then trying to impose it and defend it against multiple people. You want to trigger a reaction, to satisfy your need for interaction.

So I'll give you this response this last time, and then I'm done with the thread again:

This is an INTP forum, so already there are some expectations on what kinds of members we are expecting, although the door is open to everyone. And this guy wanders in, and I'm not even sure if he WAS this way at the beginning and seemed fine, but he got converted at some point and suddenly started spraypainting "JESUS LOVES YOU, YOU'LL GO TO HELL UNLESS YOU LOVE HIM BACK" all over the inside of the house and tossing lamb's blood on people while they're sleeping in order to save them, and blasting Bible verses on his stereo at full blast at all hours of the night, despite being asked to stop over and over; and because he isn't able to respect people's space and interact like a normal human being, eventually the landlords came by and threw him out.

End of story.

 

[Goku]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

Well, please don't put yourself on a pedestal. I also see irony and humor everywhere, but we just happen to disagree on the degree of this topic.



I think it's a lousy analogy, which is what frustrates me with you. You seem to set up these analogies just to be contrary (as they don't make sense), it actually comes off more like you just like the attention of debate. it invigorates you in some way to take this unique perspective purposefully chosen to be different, and then trying to impose it and defend it against multiple people. You want to trigger a reaction, to satisfy your need for interaction.

So I'll give you this response this last time, and then I'm done with the thread again:

This is an INTP forum, so already there are some expectations on what kinds of members we are expecting, although the door is open to everyone. And this guy wanders in, and I'm not even sure if he WAS this way at the beginning and seemed fine, but he got converted at some point and suddenly started spraypainting "JESUS LOVES YOU, YOU'LL GO TO HELL UNLESS YOU LOVE HIM BACK" all over the inside of the house and tossing lamb's blood on people while they're sleeping in order to save them, and blasting Bible verses on his stereo at full blast at all hours of the night, despite being asked to stop over and over; and because he isn't able to respect people's space and interact like a normal human being, eventually the landlords came by and threw him out.

End of story.

watt.

and yes, you guys wore me out today so I didn't put much effort into that analogy.

 

[redbaron]

As a forum member, I don't have many responsibilities, as you do.

Well if the criteria is that Cav has the capability to affect people, then the users have just as much responsibility as the mods since they're capable of affecting people as well.

Anyway, if someone is so psychologically crippled that a forum ban is really going to affect them so drastically, that ban is probably among the least of their worries.

 

[Polaris]

So, how's it going NinjaSurfer? Glad to be back?

 

[redbaron]

*gropes Polaris*

What? It's cold in Siberia

 

[Polaris]

^ I think our dear Goku would qualify for eternal Cryosleep, since he's already banned from this forum once

 

[redbaron]

Can it wait until I'm finished groping you?

 

[Goku]

Well if the criteria is that Cav has the capability to affect people, then the users have just as much responsibility as the mods since they're capable of affecting people as well.

Anyway, if someone is so psychologically crippled that a forum ban is really going to affect them so drastically, that ban is probably among the least of their worries.

you can say that as long as you wield the ban hammer (not suggesting that you have one) I don't even know who the mods are or aren't, since none of them are marked and I only realize it when one claims to be such

 

[Goku]

^ I think our dear Goku would qualify for eternal Cryosleep, since he's already banned from this forum once

???... and, what was that for, exactly?

 

[Goku]

...

I meant what was the ban for?

I also think you should post every forum member's ip address and PMs, to be fair.

 

[redbaron]

Look at the "who's online" tab, they're all there for users that aren't set to invisible. Which you're not, so it's public information still.

Oh and inb4ban.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

^Please edit the IP address out Polaris. Definitely who I was thinking of though.

 

[Goku]

Look at the "who's online" tab, they're all there for users that aren't set to invisible. Which you're not, so it's public information still.

Oh and inb4ban.

I don't think so, but show me if that's the case. I don't see where ip addresses are publicly available.

 

[Polaris]

I meant what was the ban for?

I also think you should post every forum member's ip address and PMs, to be fair.

I removed it, but you know what I'm getting at.

What the ban was for is irrelevant. Forum regulations are what they are.

 

[Goku]

I removed it, but you know what I'm getting at.

What the ban was for is irrelevant. Forum regulations are what they are.

I actually do not know what you're getting at. I already know mods can see ip addresses, lol. Your posting it is quite irrelevant.

I remember getting banned for not being 18+. Lol. My California ID says I was born in 1983, which I could have produced for you.

 

[redbaron]

Do you have an ID that displays mental age?

 

[Goku]

^Please edit the IP address out Polaris. Definitely who I was thinking of though.

I feel kind of bad for ignoring your comment on my wall, but I just wanted to be a new person for a while. I was hoping the mods would have some integrity.

Do you have an ID that displays mental age?

no.

edit: I did make a 1320 on the SAT, and 170 on the LSAT. The 1320 is rather low, for how high I think my IQ is. The 170 is probably more in line. But before I studied for the LSAT and took a prep course, I scored 154-ish.

 

[Polaris]

Yes the mods do have some integrity. This is why all members are subject to the same rules, and thus avoid any favouritism or special treatment.

Case closed.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I feel kind of bad for ignoring your comment on my wall, but I just wanted to be a new person for a while. I was hoping the mods would have some integrity.



no.

edit: I did make a 1320 on the SAT, and 170 on the LSAT. The 1320 is rather low, for how high I think my IQ is. The 170 is probably more in line. But before I studied for the LSAT and took a prep course, I scored 154-ish.

edit:Removed a potentially bad suggestion. Find a good place for yourself and be happy.

I don't see your current posts as detrimental, despite them being focused on forcing some decisive statements on this matter or ignoring you so as you are now you were not a problem.

I cannot say this for your past self though.

 

[Black Rose]

wonka now goku

I miss Da Blob also.

I don't get to have constructive conversation that often but they at least replied without turning everything into a debate at least with me. I've been here since 2010. Intelligent people don't last long in generating new ideas and long threads. The conman thread reply dwindles in philosophical content. I was banned for an emotional outburst. I'm glad I was allowed back.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

wonka now goku

I miss Da Blob also.

I don't get to have constructive conversation that often but they at least replied without turning everything into a debate at least with me. I've been here since 2010. Intelligent people don't last long in generating new ideas and long threads. The conman thread reply dwindles in philosophical content. I was banned for an emotional outburst. I'm glad I was allowed back.

Oh this is so sad.

Please, if you don't mind, point my Ne at threads where you would like to have some responses generated.

I cannot guarantee my quality will be enough for the high standards of Da Blob and others .

 

[Black Rose]

I don't want to derail but here is one:

INFJ: Integrating new infomation

 

[Hawkeye]

Yes the mods do have some integrity. This is why all members are subject to the same rules, and thus avoid any favouritism or special treatment.

Case closed.

Please don't say that all members on this forum are subjected to the same rules, because they are not.

For example: Lyra (the fact that Lyra left by his own accord is irrelevant. He is not banned, even though he has made the most accounts on this forum)

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).

Please don't respond with the "if you don't like it, you know where the door is" response.

This is merely an amusing observation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's funny how the members I relate to the most get banned. Goku/Ninjasurfer was like my doppelganger in terms of ethos. I'll miss him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtQUePN5y40

 

[Latte]

plot twist: goku, ninjasurfer and hawkeye are Lyra, who is actually a whale in space.

 

[redbaron]

For example: Lyra (the fact that Lyra left by his own accord is irrelevant. He is not banned, even though he has made the most accounts on this forum)

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).

Well, Lyra himself was never permanently banned - only his alternate accounts.

Whereas NinjaSurfer was already permanently banned for another reason prior to making his, 'Goku' account. The ban is actually because it is a dupe account, not because it is NinjaSurfer.

Also I've made dupe accounts, they were banned but I wasn't. If NinjaSurfer had made his, 'Goku' account while he was not banned, then Goku, the dupe account would have been banned.

I've had my dupe accounts banned, as has Lyra, as have a bunch of other dupe accounts - while the original account has remained unaffected. NS's original account is already banned for reasons unrelated to him making dupe accounts.

So as far as I can tell, on the issue of dupe accounts all members are treated the same once the admins discover with concrete evidence that they are indeed, dupe accounts. That said, there's a point made in the rules that all cases are up to individual discretion of the moderating team as a whole and that, 'precedent' is irrelevant.

 

[Hawkeye]

Well, Lyra himself was never permanently banned - only his alternate accounts.

Whereas NinjaSurfer was already permanently banned for another reason prior to making his, 'Goku' account. The ban is actually because it is NinjaSurfer's dupe account, not simply because it is a dupe account.

Also I've made dupe accounts, they were banned but I wasn't. If NinjaSurfer had made his, 'Goku' account while he was not banned, then Goku, the dupe account would have been banned.

I've had my dupe accounts banned, as has Lyra, as have a bunch of other dupe accounts - while the original account has remained unaffected. The issue here is that Goku's original account is already banned.

I see what you're trying to do: Make up a valid excuse reason as to why Goku was banned and Lyra wasn't except you're wrong.

Lyra was XIII long before he was Lyra and was permabanned for being XIII.

XIII has been permanently banned for being Alice... and Alice... has been banned for being XIII.

XIII Join Date: 4th-February-2009 - BANNED 23rd-May 2009

Lyra Join Date 6th-January-2010

That said, there's a point made in the rules that all cases are up to individual discretion of the moderating team as a whole and that, 'precedent' is irrelevant.

How is this not cliquishness? ^^

 

[Polaris]

Lyra joined before XIII was banned. 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.

XIII was only banned because Lyra emerged, hence a dupe-account ban in reverse. It was a pragmatic decision for the benefit of the forum and Lyra.

The mods at the time never decided that the person XIII should be permanently banned in the same fashion as NinjaSurfer/Goku was.

I will not respond to any more criticisms as this is pretty clear cut.

 

[Hawkeye]

Lyra joined before XIII was banned. 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.

XIII was only banned because Lyra emerged, hence a dupe-account ban in reverse. It was a pragmatic decision for the benefit of the forum and Lyra.

I will not respond to any more criticisms as this is pretty clear cut.

Utter rhubarb...

XIII Join Date: 4th-February-2009 - PERMABANNED 23rd-May 2009

Lyra Join Date: 6th-January-2010

Are you a 5th-dimensional being? Does time flow differently to you?

These dates are a good 7 months apart.


Just admit to cliquishness instead of making up silly propaganda.

You have been caught with your pants down; however, you still have the option to pull them up with dignified grace.

 

[Polaris]

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.

So yes, you could possibly call this cliquishness, but the mods at the time made this choice for this reason.

In any case, we have a different moderator team now. We try to be as consistent as possible. I have dug this information up so that all can see. Hopefully people will see this with a wider perspective, I certainly have more understanding of the matter of Lyra/XIII, and what actually transpired at the time. It is pretty confusing, even to the mods.

 

[Jennywocky]

plot twist: goku, ninjasurfer and hawkeye are Lyra, who is actually a whale in space.

And then the Enterprise will come back in time to capture it and take it to the future, to save earth!

 

[Base groove]

What makes you think I care about how persuasive I am? Maybe I am just a standard narcissist who likes to read the things he writes and admires them as artful masterpieces. There could be so many other reasons for behavior that I am a little perplexed that you haven't thought of the other myriad possibilities.

So I will interpret this as a proclamation that you are not to be taken seriously.

Ad-hominem?

You be the judge.

I didn't mean to come across that way. I should be banned....... you all know why.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Re: Conversation with wonkavision

But as stated, democracy is time-consuming and inefficient. It's unpaid and thankless work really, and for people who do care about the forum it would make the while thing rather unpleasant.

It's also a great way to cause more conflicts between users.

Also "I don't care if you agree with me or not, my goal is not to win you over" tends to mean whoever said it wont ever be won over and is out of arguments. I mean geez, even if you aren't out to win people over you should still strive to debate in such a way, else you may as well go talk to yourself. Such people need to look up what debating entails.

 

[The Void]

wonka now goku

I miss Da Blob also.

I don't get to have constructive conversation that often but they at least replied without turning everything into a debate at least with me. I've been here since 2010. Intelligent people don't last long in generating new ideas and long threads. The conman thread reply dwindles in philosophical content. I was banned for an emotional outburst. I'm glad I was allowed back.

I was banned for spelling mistakes.
I was banned for low quality posts.... no one ever pointed out what was low where..no warning...no nothing.
I was doing normal apparently. Made some friends. No one seemed to have hard feelings against me. But then just one day :ban!
Never got any warning anywhere. Just direct ban.
All forums are the same.
And then I bannned myself. Killed myself. Now nothing matters.

 

[Fukyo]

Please don't respond with the "if you don't like it, you know where the door is" response.

Why not? Do you not like the taste of your own medicine? I find it strange to see this coming from someone who has been hammering the point that if people don't like something, they should just ignore it.

Much like Goku who claimed that moderators take the forum too seriously, then went on to compare a ban to a literal death, you are terribly involved in all of this for someone who is 'just' amused and also doesn't take the forum too seriously.

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?

 

[Cherry Cola]

Utter rhubarb...

XIII Join Date: 4th-February-2009 - PERMABANNED 23rd-May 2009

Lyra Join Date: 6th-January-2010

Are you a 5th-dimensional being? Does time flow differently to you?

These dates are a good 7 months apart.


Just admit to cliquishness instead of making up silly propaganda.

You have been caught with your pants down; however, you still have the option to pull them up with dignified grace.

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.

 

[Pizzabeak]

How true was the stuff about Goku being 30, married, and smoking pot everyday? Were those known aspects of ninjasurfer's gimmick?