|
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/ |
If it is possible to not give a ban reason as in this ban by MoonBear then why did Wax earlier give the ban reason "a"? 
onewaystyx was just banned by Waxangel.
That account was created on 2011-09-29 17:55:55 and had 46 posts.
Reason: a
On May 22 2013 04:31 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +greggy was just temp banned for 2 days by MoonBear.
That account was created on 2010-10-31 01:08:38 and had 889 posts.
Reason: There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with people. But wtf was that post about. It was like some kind of bad fever dream post and seriously bad as well. That is not okay. Just because we are more relaxed about moderation in the LoL Subforum does not mean it's an excuse to trash post and write like shit.
You have been warned about this before by Nyovne. Learn to post more constructively.
Anyone have the post in question?
It's a bit long and rambling so I'll just provide a link.
On May 22 2013 03:42 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 22:24 MasterOfPuppets wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 21 2013 21:34 motbob wrote:
If there is a moral problem with a sponsor's policies, that moral concern should absolutely be expressed in the most visible way possible. What happens when you express a concern that is either false or at the very least not supported by any form of evidence whatsoever? Do you think we should endorse completely unsupported and unverified claims against a company, any company, in big public spotlighted threads? Case in point: several posters kept clamoring on about how Papa John's is "anti-gay", without providing any sort of evidence in that regard. Now, I didn't follow these events too closely, but as far as I know there is no incident or statement or indeed any proof that legitimizes this claim. A few people have called said posters out on their bullshit, but to no avail. Now, do you think we should allow rampant misinformation in a thread where, honestly, quite a few people are probably unfamiliar with Papa John's? Do you think this misrepresentation whereby fairly damning claims are attached on to a company's image is fair? Wouldn't this only add more fuel to the fire of hate bandwagons that we supposedly despise? My problem is really not that concerns are voiced or that people don't like Papa John's or whatever, my problem is that a bandwagon of hate keeps growing because some edgy teens think it's cool to go on the internet and vilify big corporations for completely invalid reasons, their posts perpetuating the same misinformation they themselves may or may not believe. This is no better than the posters who were calling Stephano a pedophile and a rapist. Seriously, if you're going to dislike something and then publicly express that, at least make sure you're basing your opinion off of actual fact. On May 21 2013 21:34 motbob wrote:
If TL is making a deal with a legitimately evil corporation (which Papa Johns is not, by the way), that fact should be shouted from the mountaintops, and the thread announcing the partnership is the correct place to do that. If Zynga sponsored TL, I would hope that there would be a discussion in the announcement thread about whether TL should have made a deal with a company whose business model at one point was entirely based around exploiting human psychology to extract the greatest number of dollars from wallets possible.
You are saying that the discussion should take place in another thread, but the announcement thread is precisely the correct place to have the discussion of whether TL made a mistake by entering into an agreement with Papa Johns. Again, I don't necessarily have a problem with voicing a dissenting opinion, and the reason I suggested discussion be taken to a different thread was more for the purpose of preventing misinformation and stricter quality of posting. From a sponsor point of view, would you like to invest into a scene and community where people can freely make defamatory claims at your expense without any evidence and get away with it, especially considering these claims will most likely influence a lot of potential new customers? I don't really disagree with you here, but at the same time I feel this wasn't handled as well as it could've been, especially from the stand point of "it's a good idea to ban people who have no idea what they're talking about". On May 21 2013 21:34 motbob wrote:
Wanting the discussion moved to a less visible venue is essentially advocating censorship. Funny, that's how I feel whenever I'm told to take a discussion to Website Feedback, but that's a different topic entirely. + Show Spoiler +"wah wah, people have opinions I think are unsubstantiated and that makes me so mad!"
The posters spouting obviously wrong sentiments, such as PJ's perpetrating anti-gay business practices, should be corrected and then moderated if they continue to refuse to state actual facts. This is no reason for a separate thread. Additionally, there were relatively few posters making such claims, so your declaration that the thread was full of "rampant misinformation" ends up being little more than a hyperbolic fantasy in which you've appointed yourself arbiter of acceptable discussion. Fortunately for this website, you are not a moderator. No one cares how much you dislike "edgy teens" (which, I may add, is little more than a rhetorical strategy intended to discredit entire swaths of posters who dislike the PJ's deal vociferously), if they post within the acceptable confines of the sites rules and refer to actual facts, that they be allowed to voice their concerns in the announcement thread of a controversial commercial deal is a big part of why this site is so awesome.
And finally, some people have opinions that are founded on perspectives that you may not share nor sympathize with. Get over it. A company like PJ's who decides to have a spokesperson who loudly enters his opinions into the US political sphere is going to have fallout, and the large numbers of posters in the announcement thread are by and large justified in airing grievances, regardless of your personal standard in terms of what counts as a "good" opinion. Even if you think that the spokesperson's hosting a Romney fundraiser at his castle house is a nonfactor, such a consideration is distinctly outside the bounds of forum moderation. You are welcome to, you know, actually post in the threads you cry like a baby about and contend with these opinions, but that would require that you drop the passive aggressive "I'm just so tired of bad opinions" spiel that you seem ready to throw up in Closed Threads or the ABL every time something irritates your delicate sensibilities and directly address the posting that bothers you.
I read the entire first paragraph thinking PJ's meant "pyjamas". I didn't realise it meant Papa John's until "A company like PJ's...". So I had visions of "edgy teens" outraged at pyjamas :p
|
On May 22 2013 04:45 Melliflue wrote:If it is possible to not give a ban reason as in this ban by MoonBear then why did Wax earlier give the ban reason "a"? Show nested quote +onewaystyx was just banned by Waxangel.
That account was created on 2011-09-29 17:55:55 and had 46 posts.
Reason: a
Lol. Best poster ever.
On May 21 2013 19:29 onewaystyx wrote:
Funny how you all start whining about stuff like this. I wonder how many of you even gave a fuck during the nato bombardements of the late 90s in serbia. Prolly dont even give a fuck. Well i definetly dont feel sympathy and never will for stuff like this that happens to a nation such as America. Sure its sad because children died and all that jazz, but hey, you deserved it.
User was temp banned for this post.
On May 21 2013 19:45 onewaystyx wrote:
well not gonna even bother. YOu engish are just as pathetic as the americains. Go die all of you. Please. The world would be so much better without you. Everyone hates you. Youre all fucking stupid and half your population are conservative catholic red necks that sell guns to kids. Good job America.
Inb4 permaban. Dont even bother to ip ban me since ill just change the adress.
Oh and see you in hell americain fags
|
On May 22 2013 04:45 Melliflue wrote:
I read the entire first paragraph thinking PJ's meant "pyjamas". I didn't realise it meant Papa John's until "A company like PJ's...". So I had visions of "edgy teens" outraged at pyjamas :p
What can I say, we Americans take our sleepwear VERY seriously 
Veijotin was just banned by MoonBear.
That account was created on 2013-05-21 20:31:29 and had 2 posts.
This is one of those mysterious note less bans that Mellifue linked to. I suppose the banning of 2 post Veijotin is simply not worthy of note.
|
|
|
On May 21 2013 18:15 onewaystyx wrote:
I just wanted to say here that i underestimated metal as a music genre. After actually listening to it i love it. I cant stop listening to metallica and disturbed. So awesome.
On the topic of edgy teens, onewaystyx ladies and gentlemen. You deserve having your children die because you don't care enough about other massacres around the world. Because logic.
|
Youre all fucking stupid and half your population are conservative catholic red necks that sell guns to kids.
Perhaps it's just the factual inaccuracy, but I found this sentence hilarious.
|
I like how he intends to return on other accounts. Whatever would we do without such quality posters, I wonder...
I'd also venture a wild guess that he's French, judging from his spelling "americain". That makes it a little funnier for some reason.
|
Hitch-22 was just temp banned for 2 weeks by KwarK.
That account was created on 2013-02-04 22:12:15 and had 595 posts.
Reason: Being bad at the general forum.
Oh hitch-22. Sigh. Most of the time when I see him I feel like hes right, but hes just SO aggressive about it that this isn't really that surprising :/
|
United States41964 Posts
He just forgot to go "hey guys, what are we talking about?" before going in guns blazing. Started flaming people randomly because he didn't take the time to read the posts that said what the subject was.
|
Veijotin was just banned by MoonBear.
That account was created on 2013-05-21 20:31:29 and had 2 posts.
Why was this poor guy banned? There's no reason listed, and inquiring minds (i.e me) wanna know.
|
On May 22 2013 06:15 [RIDER]DubTrub wrote:Show nested quote +Veijotin was just banned by MoonBear.
That account was created on 2013-05-21 20:31:29 and had 2 posts. Why was this poor guy banned? There's no reason listed, and inquiring minds (i.e me) wanna know.
Either scam or advertising I would assume, given that his only posts are in Diablo 3 threads (one of which in the "selling items" thread) and they were nuked.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 22 2013 11:52 Game wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 11:51 Jaaaaasper wrote:On May 22 2013 11:48 sluggaslamoo wrote:O_oops! It seems that you are banned by admin iccup.geckoxp.
Your ban expires: 19 Jan 2038 @ 04:14 CET
Ban reason: Blacklisted - slugger[wok] The fuck? What did I do? ROFL This keeps getting better. Is he banning everyone that posted in here that he can find? You won't find my main account gecko, have fun trying. ![[image loading]](http://teamzoll.com/img/Glucose-Challenge-Accepted-1.png) ? User was temp banned for this post.
Is it bad if the BW forums are hosting the genuinely bad bans that have something to do with esports?
|
To be fair to game if he had spoiled it he probably wouldn't have been banned. That is one of those threads where the topic being attacked is so ridiculous that people can get away with a lot more. Lets just say gecko, pucca and iccup iccup'd all over the situation so bad that a little iccupping of our own isn't that much of a big iccuping deal.
+ Show Spoiler +Thanks jibba,as you can see I'm stealing that
|
Netherlands6175 Posts
I know I am a bit behind here, but what did JingleHell get banned for? I can't seem to find his ban post anywhere >_<
|
On May 22 2013 19:44 DragonLord wrote:
I know I am a bit behind here, but what did JingleHell get banned for? I can't seem to find his ban post anywhere >_<
He requested it actually.
I wonder how many of you even gave a fuck during the nato bombardements of the late 90s in serbia.
I am not one to make jokes about peoples' English, because by and large I am really impressed with the non-native speakers on TL, but I never knew we bombed the late 90s XD
I also like his musings on gun control considering if he really is Swiss.
|
On May 22 2013 20:37 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 19:44 DragonLord wrote:
I know I am a bit behind here, but what did JingleHell get banned for? I can't seem to find his ban post anywhere >_< He requested it actually. Show nested quote +
I wonder how many of you even gave a fuck during the nato bombardements of the late 90s in serbia.
I am not one to make jokes about peoples' English, because by and large I am really impressed with the non-native speakers on TL, but I never knew we bombed the late 90s XD I also like his musings on gun control considering if he really is Swiss.
It's not necessarily a grammatical error, "x of the [decade or period of time here]" is very much a valid construction. Ambiguous, sure, but not wrong.
|
On May 22 2013 20:56 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:37 ThomasjServo wrote:On May 22 2013 19:44 DragonLord wrote:
I know I am a bit behind here, but what did JingleHell get banned for? I can't seem to find his ban post anywhere >_< He requested it actually.
I wonder how many of you even gave a fuck during the nato bombardements of the late 90s in serbia.
I am not one to make jokes about peoples' English, because by and large I am really impressed with the non-native speakers on TL, but I never knew we bombed the late 90s XD I also like his musings on gun control considering if he really is Swiss. It's not necessarily a grammatical error, "x of the [decade or period of time here]" is very much a valid construction. Ambiguous, sure, but not wrong.
Missing a comma, but I got up at 5:20 this morning to come into work today. My brain hasn't fully switched on yet. Fair point Mop.
|
|
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
Charlie.Sheen was just temp banned for 1 week by Nyovne.
Arceus was just temp banned for 2 weeks by Nyovne.
good, LRs will be a nicer place for a bit
|
Every time I see him posting, all I can think of is this opterown
+ Show Spoiler +
In some respects his username kind of suits him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
