|
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 April 06 2016 07:43 LegalLord wrote:
Well, the ban was after a heated exchange in which he got a ban and the other guy got a warn.
But yeah, politics gets heated sometimes. Especially international politics where people have very polarized opinions, but in domestic politics as well.
GH ultimately didn't get banned for arguing vehemently against an opposite position. He got banned for aggressively dick-wagging with another poster who shared his opinion on who took the opinion first.
On April 06 2016 23:05 LegalLord wrote:
At some point nunez stopped making real arguments and started just posting snarky one-liners. Those are very good for triggering people.
haikus are 3 lines 
|
Talking about snarky remarks ...
On April 05 2016 23:46 Paljas wrote:
i havent read but felt like posting
User was temp banned for this post.
... however this one was quite justified. If someone should have been banned, it is the posters Paljas is making fun of with this post, because those people are really, really obnoxious.
|
Yeah, that's how i read it too.
|
Paljas is the hero we need, not the hero we deserve.
|
I mean, surely, I do post "look at me, I am also watching so much SC2" in LRs all the time, but those threads exist for that specific reason anyway. While people who post "wow, that's long, I'm gonna read it now" make me want to punch someone physically in the face, because of the implied self-importance in them.
|
On April 07 2016 00:51 opisska wrote:
I mean, surely, I do post "look at me, I am also watching so much SC2" in LRs all the time, but those threads exist for that specific reason anyway. While people who post "wow, that's long, I'm gonna read it now" make me want to punch someone physically in the face, because of the implied self-importance in them.
Or maybe it's "wow ! that looks cool. Thankx,will read". Like when you say : "I'm going to watch that movie" after seeing the trailer. But i get your point though.
Only one point i disagree. LRs are not about "i watch SC2 a lot" but To talk about what you currently see with people..
Or balance whine.
|
S1mpleFan1 was just banned by The_Templar.
That account was created on 2016-04-06 23:21:06 and had 1 posts.
Reason: Inconsiderate Newb. Try harder on your previous account.
On purpose?
|
On April 07 2016 01:11 AbouSV wrote:Show nested quote +S1mpleFan1 was just banned by The_Templar.
That account was created on 2016-04-06 23:21:06 and had 1 posts.
Reason: Inconsiderate Newb. Try harder on your previous account. On purpose?
Templar trying to be Jbright but shoulda copy pasted 
|
Caldeum1977 Posts
The guy was advertising a video and was temp banned on the first account. He made another account and posted again (4th time actually) and so that account was permed. Previous is right
|
your Country52798 Posts
On April 07 2016 01:11 AbouSV wrote:Show nested quote +S1mpleFan1 was just banned by The_Templar.
That account was created on 2016-04-06 23:21:06 and had 1 posts.
Reason: Inconsiderate Newb. Try harder on your previous account. On purpose?
Yes, he has a main account (temp banned by SeeKeR) where he's been posting the same video over and over.
|
Ohhhh, that guy!
I tried looking for S1mpleman (without the last '1').
|
On April 06 2016 23:55 Heartland wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2016 23:05 LegalLord wrote:
At some point nunez stopped making real arguments and started just posting snarky one-liners. Those are very good for triggering people. It's called "Waxangel's Law" It basically states that as a poster matures on TL that posters posts will move closer towards 1 in terms of snarkiness.
I dunno, snark is pretty fun even if you do get banned for it sometimes. Though since I really haven't been able to get into the post-Kespa BW scene, it's become a bit of a non-issue for me.
|
Implies that Nunez ever made real arguments in the first place.
|
Quirkel was just banned by R1CH.
That account was created on 2016-04-07 03:22:32 and had 0 posts.
Reason: Advertising.
Confirmed mods hate Jaleel White
|
|
|
On April 06 2016 23:55 Heartland wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2016 23:05 LegalLord wrote:
At some point nunez stopped making real arguments and started just posting snarky one-liners. Those are very good for triggering people. It's called "Waxangel's Law" It basically states that as a poster matures on TL that posters posts will move closer towards 1 in terms of snarkiness.
Does age of account or number of posts hold precedence in determining the snark value of a poster?
|
On April 07 2016 03:15 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Implies that Nunez ever made real arguments in the first place.
I think he did. He had an unfortunate tendency to express frustration very vocally in ways that were not good for being taken seriously, and he sometimes posted really shitty arguments/support that got him a lot of flak. He also was outspoken, which means he could get away with a lot less shit than other shitposters.
After this blog post he pretty much stopped trying and just became a one liner snarker though.
|
On April 07 2016 04:05 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2016 23:55 Heartland wrote:On April 06 2016 23:05 LegalLord wrote:
At some point nunez stopped making real arguments and started just posting snarky one-liners. Those are very good for triggering people. It's called "Waxangel's Law" It basically states that as a poster matures on TL that posters posts will move closer towards 1 in terms of snarkiness. Does age of account or number of posts hold precedence in determining the snark value of a poster?
My study does not reveal that but your question shows the necessity of further research into the subject matter.
|
On April 07 2016 05:05 Heartland wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2016 04:05 Cricketer12 wrote:On April 06 2016 23:55 Heartland wrote:On April 06 2016 23:05 LegalLord wrote:
At some point nunez stopped making real arguments and started just posting snarky one-liners. Those are very good for triggering people. It's called "Waxangel's Law" It basically states that as a poster matures on TL that posters posts will move closer towards 1 in terms of snarkiness. Does age of account or number of posts hold precedence in determining the snark value of a poster? My study does not reveal that but your question shows the necessity of further research into the subject matter.
You have my aid in this endeavor, just point me in the right direction.
|
I still don't know if these people are this dumb or intentionally trolling
Olof1 was just temp banned for 30 days by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2016-04-05 10:40:48 and had 6 posts.
Reason: If you get banned, please do not create a new account to do exactly the same thing you just got banned for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
