|
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/ |
On June 30 2013 22:41 JackDragon wrote:I cant tell if you are serious about that. Show nested quote +Sokrates was just temp banned for 2 days by MoonBear.
That account was created on 2012-05-08 21:40:33 and had 330 posts.
Reason: Why are you following people and trying to attack them on their opinion of abortion in irrelevant topics? Don't derail threads like that. =.= You don't find stalking people in irrelevant topics to be ban worthy?
Stalking?
Dude, all he did was bring up Plainsix's recent posts frmo a recent thread... if that's stalking then anyone who has ever looked into someone else's posting history should be banned. This includes many of us here in the ABL lol.
|
It is always relevant to ABL though. Separate topics in separate thread, there was no reason to bring it up in that thread. Sure it could be a one of thing and not really stalking, but I still think that the ban sets a clear marking. That is, Don't attack another person for their opinion of one thing in an irrelevant thread.
|
On June 30 2013 22:48 JackDragon wrote:
It is always relevant to ABL though. Separate topics in separate thread, there was no reason to bring it up in that thread. Sure it could be a one of thing and not really stalking, but I still think that the ban sets a clear marking. That is, Don't attack another person for their opinion of one thing in an irrelevant thread.
Oh, but he wasn't attacking Plainsix for his opinion, he was attacking Plainsix for his incredibly flawed method of arguing and the manner in which he posts, which I think is fair (since it was civil).
|
It did come off as an ad-hominem attack, but honestly alot of us are referencing in our minds how different posters posted in other threads to gauge how we should interpret the credulity or sarcastic nature of any given post any ways. It was definitely not over the line by much.
|
That is not what I saw.Then again maybe I would understand what you where talking about if I read the abortion thread, but I haven't. In that post he just grabbed abortion from no where to try and make some sort of point. Which, again is off topic. He could have pointed out Plansixs "flawed method of arguing", whatever that means, without going off topic.
|
On June 30 2013 23:12 JackDragon wrote:
That is not what I saw.Then again maybe I would understand what you where talking about if I read the abortion thread, but I haven't. In that post he just grabbed abortion from no where to try and make some sort of point. Which, again is off topic. He could have pointed out Plansixs "flawed method of arguing", whatever that means, without going off topic.
People point out other's dirty laundry when they make claims about something all the time, it can become a trust issue. See the broodwar forums in regard to specific individuals hosting events. Because they said somethings in other threads, no one was buying it, and turns out they were right in the end. Is it wrong to prejudice an individual based on the past? Yes. Is it rational to never look at an individual's past history? No. In fact that's one of the criteria for how much allowance they give you when deciding whether you deserve a ban or not.
|
I had perused the abortion thread for awhile a day and a half ago. Maybe Sokrates's posting slipped off into the deep end since then, but he seemed all right there while I was reading him. This is the post in question, for reference.
I'm starting to agree more and more with MOP; Sokrates was pointing out an inconsistency he saw in Plansix's articulations. But ultimately, MoonBear was right that his comment was completely irrelevant to the topic of that thread. I'd've taken it to PMs instead if he cared that much.
|
On June 30 2013 23:27 cLAN.Anax wrote:I had perused the abortion thread for awhile a day and a half ago. Maybe Sokrates's posting slipped off into the deep end since then, but he seemed all right there while I was reading him. This is the post in question, for reference. I'm starting to agree more and more with MOP; Sokrates was pointing out an inconsistency he saw in Plansix's articulations. But ultimately, MoonBear was right that his comment was completely irrelevant to the topic of that thread. I'd've taken it to PMs instead if he cared that much.
Maybe Sokrates had already taken it to PMs and wouldn't leave Plansix alone. I wonder if there is more to it than we know.
Also, does anyone know what Sokrates meant with this post? He said
Just pointing out your hypocrisy. And i didnt stalk you, that thread was just under the "usa is spying on us thread".
I don't understand what he means by 'that thread was just under the "usa is spying on us thread"', or why this explains how he isn't stalking Plansix. (I'm not saying he was stalking Plansix, just that I don't understand Sokrates's explanation).
|
I'm reading that as it being the next thread down on the list.
|
On June 30 2013 23:27 cLAN.Anax wrote:I had perused the abortion thread for awhile a day and a half ago. Maybe Sokrates's posting slipped off into the deep end since then, but he seemed all right there while I was reading him. This is the post in question, for reference. I'm starting to agree more and more with MOP; Sokrates was pointing out an inconsistency he saw in Plansix's articulations. But ultimately, MoonBear was right that his comment was completely irrelevant to the topic of that thread. I'd've taken it to PMs instead if he cared that much.
I don't really don't think Sokrates points were that relevant, he really felt like he was reaching to bring up abortion in the thread. The reach was so far that I couldn't even find the post he was referencing remember when I said "shit shit can happen to anyone" in relation to abortion. He also edited his posts after I called him out on it, because he made several references to it in the later posts, which are now gone.
On July 01 2013 00:08 Melliflue wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 23:27 cLAN.Anax wrote:I had perused the abortion thread for awhile a day and a half ago. Maybe Sokrates's posting slipped off into the deep end since then, but he seemed all right there while I was reading him. This is the post in question, for reference. I'm starting to agree more and more with MOP; Sokrates was pointing out an inconsistency he saw in Plansix's articulations. But ultimately, MoonBear was right that his comment was completely irrelevant to the topic of that thread. I'd've taken it to PMs instead if he cared that much. Maybe Sokrates had already taken it to PMs and wouldn't leave Plansix alone. I wonder if there is more to it than we know. Also, does anyone know what Sokrates meant with this post? He said Show nested quote +Just pointing out your hypocrisy. And i didnt stalk you, that thread was just under the "usa is spying on us thread". I don't understand what he means by 'that thread was just under the "usa is spying on us thread"', or why this explains how he isn't stalking Plansix. (I'm not saying he was stalking Plansix, just that I don't understand Sokrates's explanation).
I don't know what he is talking about either. I did make some comments in the NSA spying thread along the lines of that I expected the government to review public information, cause its public. I don't remember talking about abortion in that thread.
|
On June 30 2013 23:18 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 23:12 JackDragon wrote:
That is not what I saw.Then again maybe I would understand what you where talking about if I read the abortion thread, but I haven't. In that post he just grabbed abortion from no where to try and make some sort of point. Which, again is off topic. He could have pointed out Plansixs "flawed method of arguing", whatever that means, without going off topic. People point out other's dirty laundry when they make claims about something all the time, it can become a trust issue. See the broodwar forums in regard to specific individuals hosting events. Because they said somethings in other threads, no one was buying it, and turns out they were right in the end. Is it wrong to prejudice an individual based on the past? Yes. Is it rational to never look at an individual's past history? No. In fact that's one of the criteria for how much allowance they give you when deciding whether you deserve a ban or not.
I agree with you on this. I don't know a lot about the BW community, but this is a completely different situation is it not? If this had been a trust issue I would think it to be relevant, but his abortion policy is not relevant to his view on stupid comments on Facebook. (yes yes I know that it is more to it then that, I just wanted to simplify it, don't get stuck on the choice of words.)
Anyway I tried to find out what he was referring to, but I quite frankly could not find it. I wasn't even sure which thread he was referring to. The rape and incest thread was the first ting in mind, but could not find Plansixs posts there, found some in the Texas senator thread, but still not sure.
|
Canada11456 Posts
I would like to remind you all the message on the top:
In addition, please don't post in here questioning whether a ban was justified; use Website Feedback for that.
|
On July 01 2013 01:15 Falling wrote:I would like to remind you all the message on the top: Show nested quote +In addition, please don't post in here questioning whether a ban was justified; use Website Feedback for that.
Sorry.
To get back to the light-hearted ban-stuff; nickbradvica got banned for bashing MLG;
On June 30 2013 06:51 nickbradvica wrote:
MLG always has the WORST lag ever. I can't even stand watching MLG events anymore because of the shitty servers or whatever it is they blame. Can't they invest some money into this issue, or at least address it and apologize? It seems like they ignore it in the hopes that we won't notice...come on, guys, we're nerds. We aren't retarded.
User was temp banned for this post.
Okay, such posts are not that out of the ordinary, but it isn't in a LR thread. Somehow he ended up posting it in the 'TL Store Spring Cleaning Sale' thread, where the previous post was 18 days ago :p
|
He was likely browsing the sale while watching MLG and didn't realize he was submitting his grievance on the wrong tab/window.
Not the worst post, might have gotten only a warning were it just in LR, but he who tempts fate gets sporked.
|
Schelim was just temp banned for 2 days by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2011-01-10 23:13:05 and had 5016 posts.
Reason: Even after several warnings your posting in LR threads is still terrible. Stop please.
Not everyday you get to see a 5k+ poster banned.
|
On July 01 2013 03:47 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +Schelim was just temp banned for 2 days by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2011-01-10 23:13:05 and had 5016 posts.
Reason: Even after several warnings your posting in LR threads is still terrible. Stop please. Not everyday you get to see a 5k+ poster banned.
you never know, sometimes you see them trying to make puns that sound very close to horrible things to say 
Also I feel like LR threads are the downfall of a lot of otherwise decent posters.
|
On June 01 2013 01:28 kmillz wrote:
Requesting 30 day ban. I'm spending way too much time here.
edit: changed month to 30 days for clarity
User was temp banned for this post.
I'm back. Ban didn't help. I just was reading more and not posting
|
Germany25658 Posts
Gave me one more ban though, so well done!
|
|
|
Woah way to be upfront man
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
