EPTFear of Banning - Page 24
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
SonuvBob
Aiur21550 Posts
| ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
EDIT: The fact that you consider that an unreasonable ban makes me wonder what your standards for people posting really are... | ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
On April 06 2011 03:57 GMarshal wrote: No, context.A story about semi raping a girl is absolutely acceptable, you are right Silmak, what could the TL mods possibly be thinking about banning someone who just confessed to raping someone as a "funny story". Oh these overly strict mods, I mean next they are going to be banning people who are bragging about beating up little girls or butchering their neighbors in a fit of rage or something... It's meant as an argument in a debate, he was asking people where the line lies. EDIT: The fact that you consider that an unreasonable ban makes me wonder what your standards for people posting really are... I take intellectualism over moral conformance any day, if someone confesses a story of murder and child rape if it's used as an argument in debate then I'd let it go.I have more respect for a murderer who can put forth an intellectual and rational argument explaining his action than someone who frowns on murder but can't argue why. (Neither is very much by the way) Especially since people were terribad at reading his point, see: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=209040¤tpage=11#205 He was quite convinced they would have sex anyway. Basically, his point was 'So, this girl I would have had sex with anyway gets half unconscious and we have sex, how does this then morally unfold?' Banning people for this just cripples academic debate. | ||
|
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
On April 06 2011 04:14 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 06 2011 03:57 GMarshal wrote: No, context.A story about semi raping a girl is absolutely acceptable, you are right Silmak, what could the TL mods possibly be thinking about banning someone who just confessed to raping someone as a "funny story". Oh these overly strict mods, I mean next they are going to be banning people who are bragging about beating up little girls or butchering their neighbors in a fit of rage or something... It's meant as an argument in a debate, he was asking people where the line lies. EDIT: The fact that you consider that an unreasonable ban makes me wonder what your standards for people posting really are... I take intellectualism over moral conformance any day, if someone confesses a story of murder and child rape if it's used as an argument in debate then I'd let it go.I have more respect for a murderer who can put forth an intellectual and rational argument explaining his action than someone who frowns on murder but can't argue why. (Neither is very much by the way) Especially since people were terribad at reading his point, see: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=209040¤tpage=11#205 He was quite convinced they would have sex anyway. Basically, his point was 'So, this girl I would have had sex with anyway gets half unconscious and we have sex, how does this then morally unfold?' Banning people for this just cripples academic debate. See I was writing a reply to this, but my first draft might have come off as a little...aggressive... So, let me see if I understood you correctly, you are saying you are perfectly fine with hanging out as a part of a community with, say, a self confessed serial murderer, as long as you only found out through academic debate? What I think you fail to understand is that more than a place for debating TL is a community, and frankly I would be disgusted to be a member of a community where rapists, murderers and pedophiles were openly accepted. I had more written, but I decided to erase it, I didn't want to come off as flaming anyone, especially since it seems you can be so "rational" about being shoulder to shoulder with a rapist (and not to enter the whole debate, but even if *he* was 90% certain they were going to have sex, from a legal stand point its still rape) EDIT: Also after reading "I have more respect for a murderer who can put forth an intellectual and rational argument explaining his action than someone who frowns on murder but can't argue why. (Neither is very much by the way)" I'm done arguing with you, its clear to me that we can never reach an understanding if thats your world view, I'll merely throw out there that he who accepts a murderer is brought down to his level, that is all. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
On April 06 2011 03:50 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=32696¤tpage=632#12659 Another grand one, seriously, it was a poster in a thread who put forth some actual arguments and actually tried to debate the matter, comes with a personal anecdote as a casus, and gets banned for it, if he had just made it a hypothetical situation but denied it ever took place no one would ban him. Again, it's your forum, you can do whatever you want, but banning people for providing stories in which they were dicks to serve as arguments in threads isn't exactly going to foster an intellectual or academic debate. Neither is banning 'no-names' who have some criticism on 'respected members of the community'. Edit: And I'm still replying to the point of being asked to cite bans of which I think they are outrageous. Especially in this case the crown being the immensely intellectual and well-argued "reason" for the ban given. I don't think it's an onerous requirement for members of TL not to be rapists. But hey, opinions and all that. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
The next time I got banned, I went to the supermarket and bought a box of sleeping pills. But as I walked back to my apartment for what I thought was the last time, somebody hit me with his car. I woke up in the hospital and looking over me was a beautiful nurse with enchanting eyes and pointy canines. But I was suddenly overcome with an intense thirst for something. I looked at the water in the cup beside my bed, but some strange instinct inside me prevented me from taking a sip. I looked up at the beautiful nurse with utter desperation. She smiled sadistically as she whispered, "How are you feeling?" I looked down at my body and realized I had miraculously healed after the accident. How was that possible? I sat up and said, "Thirsty." She took down a bloodbag from the hanger beside the bed and handed it to me. I sunk in my fangs. The next time I was banned, I found this cool feature that let me pm mods from Disneyland! | ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
On April 06 2011 04:26 GMarshal wrote: No, I'm not, but I feel that the pros outweigh the cons.See I was writing a reply to this, but my first draft might have come off as a little...aggressive... So, let me see if I understood you correctly, you are saying you are perfectly fine with hanging out as a part of a community with, say, a self confessed serial murderer, as long as you only found out through academic debate? Banning people because of that might scare people into posting such stories as argument (not at all scaring them from murdering, so it it hardly helps in the end, it's just sticking your head in the sand). I mean, it doesn't stop them from murdering, and if it delivers an interesting academic argument then I'd rather have that than 'not having to "hang out" (read: read posts of) a murder. What I think you fail to understand is that more than a place for debating TL is a community, and frankly I would be disgusted to be a member of a community where rapists, murderers and pedophiles were openly accepted. Okay, that's where we differ I suppose, I don't see myself as part of a 'community', it's a forum I post on, I'm not 'part' of it in the sense that I feel affiliated with people who also post on it. I also find it silly to ban people who've committed crimes in real life. Where's the line? Banning all people that pirate? Banning people that bm on StarCraft? Banning people that cheese?All various things that some people find morally apprehensive. I had more written, but I decided to erase it, I didn't want to come off as flaming anyone, especially since it seems you can be so "rational" about being shoulder to shoulder with a rapist Well, if it's 'rape' or not was part of the debate. I'm also not completely sure if being drunk truly doesn't make you be able to consent, I've never seen any true research on it, and in practice it seems that drunk people mainly have less inhibitions to sleep with people they already find attractive, not per se finding people attractive they normally don't.(and not to enter the whole debate, but even if *he* was 90% certain they were going to have sex, from a legal stand point its still rape) I'm not a big fan of argumenta ad legislatum. But the point was more that he posted something that he believed was on the grey area because:- She obviously didn't mind, no one got hurt. - They were going to do it anyway. | ||
|
m1
United States7 Posts
User was banned for this post. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
 i've had 2 warnings, one for quoting and +1 (this is common to do on other forums, it came naturally) and the other was commenting in korean without any english. simple rules that i wasnt aware of at the time and its something i wont be repeating. when you're banned/warned, don't rage about it, there must have been a reason for it and if there was no reason for it (ie. mod on mid life crisis laying down the ban hammer on innocents), take it up with another mod and they'll take care of it. i liked this thread, i saw some glimpse of justice ^,.^ | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
Did you know that "sperm" rhymes with "perm?" I affirm that people squirm when they get a perm as the term for their ban. Is it also coincidental that "temp" rhymes with "hemp?" There is rarely a temp in the thread about hemp. I know that they're high, but does that justify the oversupply of filth in that pig sty? And Mensrea stood upon the mountain, instilling in man the fear of Mod. How about that "warning" rhymes with "morning?" And that the opposite "night" rhymes with both words in "white knight?" I just be starting in this hood like a boss, word. | ||
KwarK
United States43799 Posts
On April 06 2011 03:50 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=32696¤tpage=632#12659 Another grand one, seriously, it was a poster in a thread who put forth some actual arguments and actually tried to debate the matter, comes with a personal anecdote as a casus, and gets banned for it, if he had just made it a hypothetical situation but denied it ever took place no one would ban him. Again, it's your forum, you can do whatever you want, but banning people for providing stories in which they were dicks to serve as arguments in threads isn't exactly going to foster an intellectual or academic debate. Neither is banning 'no-names' who have some criticism on 'respected members of the community'. Edit: And I'm still replying to the point of being asked to cite bans of which I think they are outrageous. Especially in this case the crown being the immensely intellectual and well-argued "reason" for the ban given. He raped a girl. | ||
|
Harem
United States11393 Posts
He's also had like 4-5 warnings in the past month alone. His time here was destined to be short. | ||
|
KeiQQ
United States113 Posts
The only "fear of bans" I have (which is a fear of warning, really) is in the SFW funny pics thread. Even when replying to something someone asked, whether it be a source or a story behind a picture, you get warned if you don't have a picture. The main reason I dislike this is because people who want to debate over pictures just repost shitty images 100x times and still go on debating. The NSFW thread awhile back was a little out of hand, so I understand the logic behind it, but I still don't really like it. Other than that, I've never really had a problem. | ||
|
PraetorianX
Sweden780 Posts
 I've seen people get banned for ridiculous stuff. Many comments on these forums are borderline inappropriate, but that's not necessarily a negative thing. Like, for example, I remember one person posting funny meme pictures of Kellymilkies where she is saying stuff like "Zeelot poosh" and "Warmping in stalkers" and that person got perm-banned but I thought the post was really funny. That made me scared. | ||
|
Sworn
Canada920 Posts
| ||
|
aidnai
United States1159 Posts
On April 06 2011 08:09 PraetorianX wrote: Yes I am very scared of being banned I've seen people get banned for ridiculous stuff. Many comments on these forums are borderline inappropriate, but that's not necessarily a negative thing. Like, for example, I remember one person posting funny meme pictures of Kellymilkies where she is saying stuff like "Zeelot poosh" and "Warmping in stalkers" and that person got perm-banned but I thought the post was really funny. That made me scared. You're scared that TL protects members of it's own community from tidal waves of needless, unclassy bashing? On April 06 2011 08:11 Sworn wrote: I wouldn't mind if TL mods were more lenient a lot of posts get warned or banned when they really should while a bunch of dumb posts don't even get touched. I think they need to take a step backward into focusing on the idiots instead of inappropriate posts unless they was way over the line Your run on is hard to understand, but I think you are saying people should be banned for being wrong, not for being insulting or rude? I completely disagree if that's what you are saying... | ||
Fyodor
Canada971 Posts
Another point is that in any serious thread the mods seem to discourage actual dialectic and by that I mean "back and forth arguments". How do you expect to have a serious discussion at all if we can't "rub each other out" so-to-speak. IMO Dialectic is the only productive thing you can do on a forum thread when the information is largely already known by the participants. | ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
It's really a classic case of 'I mind, so you should mind too.' That said, even if he raped her, even if she violently resisted and he told it, it's still presented as a vessel for debate, scaring people from posting morally apprehensive things they have done as a vessel for debate just counters any intellectualism and discourse. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On April 06 2011 09:08 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: That's really in the eye of the beholder, and she didn't mind to begin with. It's really a classic case of 'I mind, so you should mind too.' That said, even if he raped her, even if she violently resisted and he told it, it's still presented as a vessel for debate, scaring people from posting morally apprehensive things they have done as a vessel for debate just counters any intellectualism and discourse. i just think it was unnecessary. i only read that comment and not the thread so i dont know what it was about, however, it seems unappropriated to talk about. its no different than a child molester coming in here and explain his plan on how he did what he did and relate it to a strategy in sc2. | ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
| ||
| ||
