|
On February 08 2019 00:42 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2019 23:18 travis wrote:
Hmmm
Surprisingly I think I will just give the mods the benefit of the doubt and let this go without being annoying about it. The website has become a little more "PC" over time but when I think about it I don't have many examples of mods being abusive of their powers.
It is too bad, though
also where is that ban list hidden at??? There's no point in linking to the thread, as it changes title (and therefore link) every time someone new gets banned. But if you search for "Automated ban list" in the search field, it will be the top result
You can actually use this:
https://www.teamliquid.net/forum/closed-threads/32696-a?page=2135
As long as the character+number is enough to uniquely identify the thread, it works I think
I know I've racked up a few warnings over the years, but I don't think I've ever seen a moderation decision that I seriously disagree with. There was one case where ban(s) happened and reverted after some discussion it was rolled back since it was a bit too heavy handed.
I'm don't care too much either way on the decision, I've always felt that the regular cast of politics posters are heavily entrenched into their respective viewpoints. There's a fair number of "neutral" posters from outside the USA but the vast majority of us lean left when looking at the US.
|
I think this is the least okay I’ve ever been with a ban. I might try to type up my feelings later, but for reference, remember that time Kwark perm’d LL? That felt more fair than this.
|
Canada11355 Posts
I lurk(ed) both us pol threads and looked forward to reading GH's take on many issues. Just putting my name in as someone who dislikes the ban.
|
On February 08 2019 02:38 ShoCkeyy wrote:
xM(z ehhhh, I mean, I think they're considerate of what you've done in the past vs the present. I can attest to that with my long history here. I think it really just depends on how you've handled yourself through out those years. you're assuming intent here, positive intent; they show some leniency to see if you can uphold <rules> because they're good guys and care but, if i were you, i'd see it like this: 'hmm, that's not really a ban-worthy offense but no worries, i'll give him time, he'll get there for sure. it's malicious entrapment.
you can see this in comments of <users+ Show Spoiler +>, when they assume X will go down Y road because of the way he posts. it's like they 'read' someone then wait for the inevitability, and that's the best case scenario. the worst case, they peck on you based on what they assume you are and represent until you snap.
besides, the dude actually changed from when he first started his political debates.
@Excludos: you have there a circular logic - he steals so he's an asshole and he's an asshole because he steals.
in this case it's obvious GH wasn't always stealing so if you could insert somewhere in there 'stealing to give to the poor'(for ex.) case ... just to see where it'll lead your logic.
fuck the fact that he was a veteran, he did change/evolved in some manner/sense/direction and that should matter.
what one says to excuse an action should have no bearing on anything because it's intent is unknowledgeable so its value is unquantifiable.
|
How many times do I need to let someone steal from me before I can assume they are an asshole?
|
|
|
On February 08 2019 03:57 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2019 02:38 ShoCkeyy wrote:
xM(z ehhhh, I mean, I think they're considerate of what you've done in the past vs the present. I can attest to that with my long history here. I think it really just depends on how you've handled yourself through out those years. you're assuming intent here, positive intent; they show some leniency to see if you can uphold <rules> because they're good guys and care but, if i were you, i'd see it like this: 'hmm, that's not really a ban-worthy offense but no worries, i'll give him time, he'll get there for sure. it's malicious entrapment. you can see this in comments of <users + Show Spoiler +>, when they assume X will go down Y road because of the way he posts. it's like they 'read' someone then wait for the inevitability, an that's the best case scenario. the worst case, they peck on you based on what they assume you are and represent until you snap. besides, the dude actually changed from when he first started his political debates. @Excludos: you have there a circular logic - he steals so he's an asshole and he's an asshole because he steals. in this case it's obvious GH wasn't always stealing so if you could insert somewhere in there 'stealing to give to the poor'(for ex.) case ... just to see where it'll lead your logic. fuck the fact that he was a veteran, he did change/evolved in some manner/sense/direction and that should matter. what one says to excuse an action should have no bearing on anything because it's intent is unknowledgeable so its value is unquantifiable.
That's not circular logic, not even remotely. You changing the order of the words doesn't make it circular, watch: "I drowned so I died" and "I died because I drowned" are not two opposites. If you steal, you're an asshole, which is the exact same as saying someone is an asshole because he steals.
Back to GH: He changed..? To and from what? This perm ban isn't out of the blue, but follows two temp bans within a week, including necroing an 8 year old thread with a shitpost. If he's changed, then this is not in a good direction.
My earliest memory of interacting with the guy was him sending me private messages of 9/11 conspiracy theories, and later harassing me for not replying to him in the main thread fast enough (I say harass, might be a bit strong. It only took him 4 messages to give up..). This was exactly a year ago.
|
circular logic/reasoning has nothing to do with opposites so i've no idea what's going on there but on the he changed part: he changed from ' fuck the whites in power' to 'fuck the power!; but while you're at it, fuck the whites too just because(some bitterness there because he realized he is the part of the power problem) but hey, i'll take increments as long as there's a heading.
the rest goes into how much sensible/offend-able are you; he was a pusher for sure but i always saw it(at its worst) as being loudmouthed.
@Plansix: define stealing.
|
Nah, I’m good. It is your hypothetical, so you can define it.
|
was Excludos' but i was going for wealth redistribution; just so you'd know.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 08 2019 03:25 ChristianS wrote:
I think this is the least okay I’ve ever been with a ban. I might try to type up my feelings later, but for reference, remember that time Kwark perm’d LL? That felt more fair than this.
Only ban I got from him was a week. Maybe you’re thinking of someone else?
My guess is Seeker perming P6?
|
To be fair to seeker, I has a rash of drunk posts and dumb 2 day bans right before that.
|
On February 08 2019 05:03 xM(Z wrote:
@Plansix: define stealing.
Damn, we're on this level already?
|
Ban reason seems a bit odd. Whatever happened to an escalating series of lengthening bans? We are left to speculate. I suppose the actual reason would be PM's about GH necroing up old threads, to which he appeared to be playing a foolish game of dare against the mods. Still, I can't say I am sad to see GreenHorizons gone.
|
On February 08 2019 06:32 Jealous wrote:Damn, we're on this level already?
I’m the master of getting to the rhetorical question phase of poorly thought out internet arguments.
|
User was banned for this post.
|
Why not a 6 month temp ban or something, or was that already tried? I’ll be sad to see GH go forever as he was someone I definitely thought provided value in many conversations especially when it came to politics. But if he’s not complying with acceptable TL community behavior and not listening to the mod staff, not much else could be done.
|
On February 08 2019 05:53 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2019 03:25 ChristianS wrote:
I think this is the least okay I’ve ever been with a ban. I might try to type up my feelings later, but for reference, remember that time Kwark perm’d LL? That felt more fair than this. Only ban I got from him was a week. Maybe you’re thinking of someone else? My guess is Seeker perming P6?
Damn, I coulda sworn that was a perm that got reversed. Nvm then, bad example
|
I mean GH should definitely not be banned but I'm sure you're surprised I have this opinion
|
On February 08 2019 04:06 Plansix wrote:
How many times do I need to let someone steal from me before I can assume they are an asshole?
depends on if you want to sleep with them or not
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
