|
Anno
Experimenter



Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,166
Loc: my room
Last seen: 19 days, 23 hours
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: JettaJay]
#3438296 - 12/02/04 03:33 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
>Anno was not very cool the other day when I was trying to figure something out for a >fellow shroomerite.
Just for the sake of objectivity, here is the link, where "Anno was not very cool": http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/3431799
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: JettaJay]
#3438434 - 12/02/04 04:05 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hahaha, yeah, the thing is (in luvdem's case at least), the original offense took place in the Politics forum. That forum is FOR ARGUING. There are strict rules in place to prevent personal attacks, so the ARGUMENTS can stay on topic, and people can express their opinion without fear of being personally attacted. Simply, if personal attacks were allowed in PA&L fewer people would share their opinions. In other forums, the flaming rules are more lenient (but still strictly enforced). Most mods, of other forums, look the other way when someone says they "Suck". This case is a little different. Here's a copy of Rono's PA&L rules: 1) NO FLAMING ...if you can't state your case or refute someone elses case without calling them "stupid" or an "idiot"..etc...Then don't bother posting here. This forum is for intelligent debate, not to try to belittle someone that doesn't think like you. THIS WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED ... If you have been warned already, you will receive a temporary ban, if you continue to flame you will be banned permanently...choose your words wisely or suffer the consequences. 2) Although not always possible, when quoting a source please provide a link. That's it. _________________ Rono states examples of flames, his examples: "stupid" or "idiot"..etc... I believe, in THAT forum, "Suck" fits in somewhere between "stupid" and "idiot"... therefore I deem saying someone "Sucks," in PA&L to be Flaming. After a warning, it is banable offense. Actually, I gave luvdem more warnings than he was entitled to. I hope you understand, this has nothing to do with my personal feelings. I understand why some people may consider it strict... but Rono says in the Rules in BOLD: "THIS WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED". To be a Mod, I must follow and enforce the rules of the forums I moderate, even if the Rules are strict.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
JettaJay
PsychedelicStranger


Registered: 10/14/04
Posts: 2,829
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3438584 - 12/02/04 04:30 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cervantes said: Hahaha, yeah, the thing is (in luvdem's case at least), the original offense took place in the Politics forum. That forum is FOR ARGUING. There are strict rules in place to prevent personal attacks, so the ARGUMENTS can stay on topic, and people can express their opinion without fear of being personally attacted. Simply, if personal attacks were allowed in PA&L fewer people would share their opinions.
In other forums, the flaming rules are more lenient (but still strictly enforced). Most mods, of other forums, look the other way when someone says they "Suck".
This case is a little different.
Here's a copy of Rono's PA&L rules:
1) NO FLAMING ...if you can't state your case or refute someone elses case without calling them "stupid" or an "idiot"..etc...Then don't bother posting here. This forum is for intelligent debate, not to try to belittle someone that doesn't think like you. THIS WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED ... If you have been warned already, you will receive a temporary ban, if you continue to flame you will be banned permanently...choose your words wisely or suffer the consequences.
2) Although not always possible, when quoting a source please provide a link.
That's it. _________________
Rono states examples of flames, his examples: "stupid" or "idiot"..etc... I believe, in THAT forum, "Suck" fits in somewhere between "stupid" and "idiot"... therefore I deem saying someone "Sucks," in PA&L to be Flaming. After a warning, it is banable offense. Actually, I gave luvdem more warnings than he was entitled to.
I hope you understand, this has nothing to do with my personal feelings. I understand why some people may consider it strict... but Rono says in the Rules in BOLD: "THIS WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED". To be a Mod, I must follow and enforce the rules of the forums I moderate, even if the Rules are strict.
Agreed
....
Bring the smack down !!! j/k
-------------------- I saw a little green light buzzing around in a tree, and it dawned on me that "they" were here ~~~LouiseLouise
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: JettaJay]
#3438673 - 12/02/04 04:50 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Oh, and just so you know... Anno's a teddy bear. It cracks me up how many people think he is being mean (I did when I first read some of his posts). I swear, if you ever heard Anno talk, you'd hear his good nature in every word he types! And Anno is a guy. He's not Anna. He is from the land of AHHHNOLD. He talks like a Hippie Terminator. Hope that clears things up.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3439149 - 12/02/04 06:22 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Am I correct to understand that Luvdem got banned for saying that you suck as a moderator? What if Luvdem had said, "Cervantes, old chap, I dearly love you but I must sadly report that, for reasons previously exposed in this same thread, you are really not up to the task of a proper moderator, in this forum or any other?" Would he have been banned then? Isn't saying that you "suck as a moderator" the same thing, though without the honorifics. He was, in point of fact stating his case. His case was that you suck as a mod. (I make no assertion as to my own opinion}. Is it forbidden to criticize a mod, or to use the word suck. He said you suck as a mod, he believes it, judging by the thread you linked he has a reasonable argument. This is not a flame boys. He didn't just scream "YOU SUCK." He said you suck as a mod. I'm sorry, you are wrong here
--------------------
|
MOTH
Wild Woman


Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 23,431
Loc: In the jungle
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3439154 - 12/02/04 06:23 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I like Anno because I tend to develop crushes on authority figures.
|
Anno
Experimenter



Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,166
Loc: my room
Last seen: 19 days, 23 hours
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: zappaisgod]
#3439176 - 12/02/04 06:29 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
>am I correct to understand that Luvdem got banned for saying that you suck as a moderator?
No, you are not.
>Is it forbidden to criticize a mod, or to use the word suck.
Neither is forbidden per se. It depends on who, when, whom, how frequently, and with what previous ban history uses it.
>I'm sorry, you are wrong here
You are free to have your opinion on things.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#3439219 - 12/02/04 06:37 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: Right. I can imagine how it went......
Nah nah nyah nyah na..... I'm a mod and even though you're right.... I'm gonna ban you anyway just to shut you up. So there poopy head!
Water under the bridge? It always was but as mods go.... you suck.
Sure looks like it to me. He just left out the "as a mod" part in the next post, figuring it was understood. You guys are wrong.
--------------------
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: zappaisgod]
#3439256 - 12/02/04 06:45 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You are free to say I suck as a mod in Trip Tips, the other forum I moderate, although... if you kept it up for too long, I'd eventually get around to showing you exactly how much I suck. Luvdem said I suck in PA&L (a forum with strict rules, especially in Oct of a year divisible by 4), and I warned him. He continued to post OFF TOPIC posts after several repeated warnings until I was left with no choice but to ban him... to allow the "Go out and vote" thread to get back on topic. If you look at the thread, it WAS able to continue for quite some time once it returned to its topic of discussion. Also, I made no refrence to his ban in the thread to prevent further off-topic drama. I stand by the ban, and the second ban for Luvdem's continued ignorance of the rules that banned him the first time. Trust me, Luvdem knows the rules well enough to cry foul when other people break them. Conclision; don't fuck with people that have the ban button, by continued breaking of the Forum rules, unless you are willing to suffer the consequences. And don't break the same rule again, after you have been banned once before, unless you are willing to suffer even harsher consequences.. What are the consequences exactly? Well, you get to visit all the websites on the Internet but this one until your ban is lifted. Not very harsh really, in the grand scheme of things.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3439344 - 12/02/04 07:03 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I can't argue that the original ban was not justified on the basis of his thread derailment (although there seemed to be two involved in that). But this one is just wrong. The title of this forum is Shroomery feedback and administration. Wouldn't this be the appropriate place to express your opinion that someone might suck as a mod? And isn't that all he did. Or is the lesson he failed to learn that you don't tweak the "man". You have become what you hated. "Don't fuck with people who have the ban button," indeed. "Not very harsh?" Sure, but wrong nonetheless. Surely your not trying to justify unfair punishment by pointing out that the punishment isn't very bad.
This is like shooting fish in a barrel.
--------------------
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: zappaisgod]
#3439359 - 12/02/04 07:07 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I was not the one that banned him today, nor did I ask for his banishment. And I don't care too much about my personal suckage. I have no more authority than you do in this forum. A moderator of THIS forum, or an Admin, saw what luvdem said, and acted accordingly. Hell, I actually replied to luvdem before I knew he was banned. The first post I made after Anno said he was banned, was written during the BAN itself. I didn't know about luvdem's banishment until I finished posting my reply to luv's last post. Then I saw Anno had posted before me, and discovered that luvdem had been banned. Hope that clears things up.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3439377 - 12/02/04 07:11 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I realise who banned him. You're the one who kept responding though. I hope Anno reads this.
--------------------
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: zappaisgod]
#3439417 - 12/02/04 07:22 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Zap, let me reconstruct what I can, I imagine Anno's sleeping right now. I was simply responding to let Luv know what he had missed, when he did not receive his E-mail, which I did write. He obviously wished he had that information, and since no record remained of the banning itself, I was the ONLY person who could provide Luvdem with the information surrounding his banning. When I did convey this information to luvdem, in this thread, I did not go into specifics. Specifics were intentionally withheld so luvdem wouldn't be publicly humiliated for a ban which he had already served. That is when Luvdem started saying I "Suck" in this forum. Obviously, Luvdem remembered the word that got him in trouble (SUCK), but didn't know why he was banned (I figure, since he was still saying I SUCK), I went into specifics, to show him that, yes, "Suck" was the word that got him in trouble. I even provided the link, in the interest of full disclosure . This was the FIRST TIME, I had ever said ANYTHING SPECIFIC about the event in PUBLIC. Only after Luvdem repeated his offense, did I go into specifics. Until then, I really was concerned with keeping his ban private, or between him and me. After his actions today. Fuck it! It seems he wants full disclosure. I'll talk about everything surrounding his ban, while he isn't here to remind me of my personal suck rating. After I went into specifics with Luvdem, in this thread, he said I suck a second time, in a double post (actually, he only said "SUCK" in one of those posts... must've been an afterthought). I wrote my reply (which you can scroll up and read) after Anno had already reported luv's banishment. p.s. I keep replying to you, does that mean I suck?
I hope, my Cliff's note's version of the events you can READ FOR YOURSELF IN THIS THREAD, help you in understanding the situation, the order of events, and the logic behind the decisions that I, and others made, and continue to stand by. Besides, explaining my Mod-Logic for a banning keeps this thread on topic. I can not speak specifically about the logic behind Luv's banning today (Perhaps Anno will later), but it obviously happened because he continued to publicly break the rule that banned him. Flaming mods in public is not smart. I didn't create the rule, and today, I didn't need to enforce it.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
Edited by Rose (12/02/04 07:54 PM)
|
CaRnAgECaNdY
Tool's groupie


Registered: 04/09/04
Posts: 11,505
Loc: Billy Howerdel's closet
Last seen: 6 months, 22 days
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: MOTH]
#3439502 - 12/02/04 07:35 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
EllemyshShade said: I like Anno because I tend to develop crushes on authority figures.
Haha, same here! 
I got banned on thanksgiving. I assumed I was banned for post whoring in the pub which I don't believe I was doing. I'm not mad about it though. I WAS NOT sent an email explaining why I was banned. A very friendly mod explained to me the reason only after I was allowed back. If a message was sent..I did not recieve one.
BTW, Anno...are you single?
--------------------
The secret to being funny is to say smart things stupidly, or is it stupid things smartly? Whatever..it's not rocket surgery...or something like that.
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: CaRnAgECaNdY]
#3439522 - 12/02/04 07:38 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I don't know if he's single, but he has an accent.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
CaRnAgECaNdY
Tool's groupie


Registered: 04/09/04
Posts: 11,505
Loc: Billy Howerdel's closet
Last seen: 6 months, 22 days
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3439535 - 12/02/04 07:40 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
--------------------
The secret to being funny is to say smart things stupidly, or is it stupid things smartly? Whatever..it's not rocket surgery...or something like that.
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: CaRnAgECaNdY]
#3439631 - 12/02/04 07:55 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
He is also a man of few words... just like Ahhnold. Yeah, Anno's the Shroominator.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
Super_Blunt
Candyman


Registered: 10/25/04
Posts: 3,140
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Rose]
#3440189 - 12/02/04 10:06 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
40oz


Registered: 01/18/01
Posts: 30,119
Loc: Sandy Eggo. Ca.
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: Anno]
#3440363 - 12/02/04 10:50 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anno said: Some poeple just don't get it.... You earned yourself a 3 day ban.
redicklous.
--------------------
- - - -
  tiny_rabid_birds said: "your avatar is dirty."
|
Diploid
Cuban


Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: reasons need to be given when a person gets banned [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#3440850 - 12/03/04 01:35 AM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Maybe it IS BEING, yet I was banned and received no notification.
Overzealous spam filter?
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
|