EPTThe Automated Ban List - Page 1621
| Forum Index > TL Community |
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil. NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ | ||
monk
United States8476 Posts
| ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
On January 04 2013 14:59 monk. wrote: Please read the new mod note and take this to the website feedback forum. Ah, got it :D | ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
| ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
On January 04 2013 15:03 nunez wrote: ah, lame. that kills this thread for me. My post did?  or are you saying the new mod note? seems like it's still a place for laughing at bans... right? :D | ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
On January 04 2013 15:06 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: My post did? or are you saying the new mod note? seems like it's still a place for laughing at bans... right? :D aha, no, the mod note. i mistook the thread for being a place to discuss bans in the sense if you agreed with it or not, the old mod note fooled me. edit: your post was pretty good. | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
On January 04 2013 14:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Then what about the post Figgy was responding to? is that then, not similarly implying that the gun control/laws in USA are fine, by justifying the incidents by arguing that accidents must happen time to time in a large sample [ of people ] ? Didn't see it, been drinking. Heavily. Excuse my lack of research. I am open to debate on the matter, just very drunk. Off to find that thread. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
On January 04 2013 15:12 ThomasjServo wrote: Didn't see it, been drinking. Heavily. Excuse my lack of research. I am open to debate on the matter, just very drunk. Off to find that thread. Haha, ok. There's a link in my post at the very bottom below the wall of text in case you didn't see it | ||
|
docvoc
United States5491 Posts
On January 04 2013 09:26 m3rciless wrote: haha what a shit blog and i hate you as a person for the things you wrote here. I cant believe you're self-absorbed enough to think 1) anyone gives a shit about your cinema bullshit 2) youre actually right about any of this edit: wait now i cant tell if youre srs How does one go about being that much of a douche to TDL when he writes a blog O.o | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
On January 04 2013 15:48 docvoc wrote: so in order to laugh at bans How does one go about being that much of a douche to TDL when he writes a blog O.o never underestimate the capacity for re activity. As much leeway as blogs allow, people seem to forget that mods are still present | ||
|
frogrubdown
1266 Posts
Manit0u was just temp banned for 2 weeks by KwarK. That account was created on 2004-08-16 10:09:19 and had 9551 posts. Reason: You might want to stop posting in the pictures topic given you now have about a dozen mod actions regarding it. You got a previous ban for this + Show Spoiler + directly instructing you to stop posting racist pictures. If you are unable to stop then you will be banned. That is all. I didn't see the red ink actually attached to his post. It'd probably be a good idea to put it there so that future posters know not to use the "image of a random black dude + racism" meme, not that anyone should need guidance on that. | ||
|
MountainDewJunkie
United States10344 Posts
Is it time to create a "serious" ABL thread in the Website Feedback forum? | ||
|
Chylith
Canada167 Posts
On January 04 2013 16:09 MountainDewJunkie wrote: Confused by mod note. We've been discussing bans for the duration of the thread, and laughing, but we can now only speak of bans if in jest? Discussing some bans is sometimes more constructive than el oh elling at others... Is it time to create a "serious" ABL thread in the Website Feedback forum? I think it's more referring to the occasions of people who've been coming here and saying "I shouldn't have been banned for 'X' reason or my friend/cousin/co-worker/relative/hero didn't deserve that ban because of 'X'" That's just my assumption/interpretation of it though =o | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
| ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
On January 04 2013 16:49 Chylith wrote: I think it's more referring to the occasions of people who've been coming here and saying "I shouldn't have been banned for 'X' reason or my friend/cousin/co-worker/relative/hero didn't deserve that ban because of 'X'" That's just my assumption/interpretation of it though =o that wouldn't make sense though, since the latest two cases was me and yoshi not disagreeing with two other bans. both of us were told to take it to website feedback by cokefreak and sermokala respectively, but it seems to be pretty divided. critiquing a ban is just as much feedback as complementing a ban, and you can not have a discussion when only one side of the matter is allowed. i don't see why one should be more appropriate for the community forum and the other more appropriate for the website feedback forum, at least as long as you keep it civil and relatively objective. they are both conerning the community, and they are both website feedback. this might be me being blind and history-less, and maybe there has been some bad experiences with it in the past. i even bet i could find this very discussion if i just searched a bit in this thread. maybe there is some reasonable explanation why this should not be the place to discuss bans, which the previous modnote and OP would indicate. edit: this is kind of besides the 'new point' of the thread, but i would think that a discussion about the purpose of a specific thread would most easily be done in the same thread which all the people it would concern are reading anyways. | ||
|
Iplaythings
Denmark9110 Posts
On January 04 2013 17:01 dAPhREAk wrote: seriously lame mod note to take away the ability to discuss bans. The mods have been saying the same for like a year atleast, whatchu all complaining about | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On January 04 2013 17:20 nunez wrote: that wouldn't make sense though, since the latest two cases was me and yoshi not disagreeing with two other bans. both of us were told to take it to website feedback by cokefreak and sermokala respectively, but it seems to be pretty divided. critiquing a ban is just as much feedback as complementing a ban, and you can not have a discussion when only one side of the matter is allowed. Very good. A discussion requires multiple points of view. And that's exactly why we shouldn't be having a discussion about bans here. This thread is about ridiculing people who get banned and bans in general, not discussing them. If you turn this into a general "talk about bans" thread, then it loses the reason why I follow it. I come here to see idiots getting banned and have a good laugh. That's what the OP is all about, and that's what this thread is all about. Criticizing a ban detracts from that purpose. There's a reason why this isn't called the "ban feedback" thread; we don't want feedback here. We want mockery. | ||
|
AmericanUmlaut
Germany2581 Posts
On January 04 2013 17:38 Iplaythings wrote: The mods have been saying the same for like a year atleast, whatchu all complaining about They've been saying we should stay on topic here and discuss bans, rather than discussing hamsters, cheese, Mafia, toast puns and whatever other fun nonsense the thread's community used to dream up. That makes sense in terms of TL's posting rules, though I feel like it made the site less fun in this one particular case (the old atmosphere in the thread before it got stricter was a lot of fun). Now they're saying we can't even really discuss bans, we can only laugh at them. It was always the rule that you couldn't complain about bans in here, but the way the mod note is written we're now forbidden from discussing any topic other than bans here, and also we're only allowed to express a single opinion ("That's funny") about bans. That effectively prevents any meaningful discussion, and that's what people are complaining about. | ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
i would think that the purpose of a thread is decided by it's inhabitants and OP. and the OP surely leaves at some leeway for discussion (even though the main focal point is clearly to laugh at), so did the old modnote and the responses have been divided so far. there has been no heated argument, only light discussion. in my case i posted my view ("that ban was a bit harsh"), cokefreak engaged me first and then told me to go to another thread when i responded to his question in a manner that he apparently deemed unsatisfactory. i felt i was well within the confines of this thread. i can easily see why a lot of heated debates whether or not a ban was justified would take away from your enjoyment of the thread, but i don't see that a little discussion would. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
| ||
Firebolt145
Lalalaland34496 Posts
:D | ||
| ||
