Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
Quote from: En_Route on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
Why don't you ask an open question that might shed light on the situation rather than repeat a loaded question obviously intended to bully a fellow member?
Oh and don't try the passive aggressive line you pulled last time the "Go ahead ban me" routine.
Do that I'll ban you.
Tank
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 04:25:22 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
Why don't you ask an open question that might shed light on the situation rather than repeat a loaded question obviously intended to bully a fellow member?
Oh and don't try the passive aggressive line you pulled last time the "Go ahead ban me" routine.
Do that I'll ban you.
Tank
Go ahead. Ban me.
Edit: Corrected quotation marks - Tank
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 04:25:22 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
Why don't you ask an open question that might shed light on the situation rather than repeat a loaded question obviously intended to bully a fellow member?
Oh and don't try the passive aggressive line you pulled last time the "Go ahead ban me" routine.
Do that I'll ban you.
Tank
I might add that I Imagine Sweetdearh is well able to fight her own corner. I also hardly think one sharp retort constitutes bullying. You are a sad little man Tank.
Quote from: En_Route on July 08, 2012, 05:08:40 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 04:25:22 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Anti-antidisestablishmentarianism on July 07, 2012, 07:01:28 PM
Hello and welcome!! You are right about people who will not read books that contradict the bible. I live about half a mile from South Carolina so hooray for me >:(
fuck, that sucks. :(
You're telling me. Though I have found about 300 atheists in the area. And a lot of them are very rude, crude, offensive and anti politically correct than I could ever imagine. I fit right into the group!! ;D
Haha!!
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
Why don't you ask an open question that might shed light on the situation rather than repeat a loaded question obviously intended to bully a fellow member?
Oh and don't try the passive aggressive line you pulled last time the "Go ahead ban me" routine.
Do that I'll ban you.
Tank
I might add that I Imagine Sweetdearh is well able to fight her own corner. I also hardly think one sharp retort constitutes bullying. You are a sad little man Tank.
And you can kiss my arse
Banned for 7 days
If I choose to support a member in what I consider bullying I will do so and have done so.
"I also hardly think one sharp retort constitutes bullying." it starts somewhere and once is enough on this forum.
En_route I know you can read this. If you bother to come back you have to understand that if you had written what you wrote there to ANY member here you would have been given a suspension of 7 days.
I had missed the first post where En-Route decided to push his luck.
Thus I was happy to let it go at a 7 day suspension.
Having now seen the "Go Ahead. Ban Me." comment I have extended the ban to a permanent.
Tank
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 05:45:14 PM
I had missed the first post where En-Route decided to push his luck.
Thus I was happy to let it go at a 7 day suspension.
Having now seen the "Go Ahead. Ban Me." comment I have extended the ban to a permanent.
Tank
Tank is one bad ass dude.
I didn't even see this til now. Wow, what a troll that guy was. :-\
I take no pleasure whatsoever from banning members, it's just something that comes with the broom.
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 07:05:52 PM
I take no pleasure whatsoever from banning members, it's just something that comes with the broom.
Well, he was literally asking for it. :D
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 07:06:32 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 07:05:52 PM
I take no pleasure whatsoever from banning members, it's just something that comes with the broom.
Well, he was literally asking for it. :D
Yes he was. You did the right thing, Tank. Banning folks is never an easy decision - except for spammers, they deserve banning and mocking.
Okay, I am never toeing the line. Ever.
Why was En_Route banned?
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:26:26 PM
Why was En_Route banned?
Why is there always drama when I'm working the graveyard shift?
Quote from: Guardian85 on July 08, 2012, 07:39:14 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:26:26 PM
Why was En_Route banned?
Why is there always drama when I'm working the graveyard shift?
Because there is nothing better to do.
Quote from: Guardian85 on July 08, 2012, 07:39:14 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:26:26 PM
Why was En_Route banned?
Why is there always drama when I'm working the graveyard shift?
No idea but I checked out the so called offense which got En_Route banned and seems like a load of bull shit to me.
Starting to get a bit sick of this place due to the mods recently. It's beginning to appear to me that certain mods are allowing personal feelings towards members get in the way of doing a good job.
Well I mean yeah I must agree. when somebody says ban me that seems like a pretty easy decision.
I'll admit, after my initial little kerfuffle with En_Route, I was starting to get accustomed to having him around. I just don't understand why he always had to make things personal when he disagreed with someone. ??? We have some other pretty opinionated people around here, but they (usually) steer clear of personal attacks and they're fine.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:57:39 PM
Quote from: Guardian85 on July 08, 2012, 07:39:14 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:26:26 PM
Why was En_Route banned?
Why is there always drama when I'm working the graveyard shift?
No idea but I checked out the so called offense which got En_Route banned and seems like a load of bull shit to me.
*nods in agreement then quickly runs away*
The severity of this particular incident could be questioned, I think, but he does have a bit of a history for not handling conflict in the most tactful way. Telling moderators that they're arrogant and power-hungry, or "sad little people" on more than one occasion is enough to warrant the action, I'd think. This is also the second time that he directly asked a moderator to ban him (two different moderators), so I don't feel that badly about it.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 08, 2012, 08:08:16 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:57:39 PM
Quote from: Guardian85 on July 08, 2012, 07:39:14 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:26:26 PM
Why was En_Route banned?
Why is there always drama when I'm working the graveyard shift?
No idea but I checked out the so called offense which got En_Route banned and seems like a load of bull shit to me.
*nods in agreement then quickly runs away*
Ordinarily, I would agree as well but when someone actually, literally, asks to be banned I don't have a problem with them then getting banned. I realize it's just a show of bravado but that "go ahead, ban me!" thing just ticks me off.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 08:12:46 PM
The severity of this particular incident could be questioned, I think, but he does have a bit of a history for not handling conflict in the most tactful way. Telling moderators that they're arrogant and power-hungry, or "sad little people" on more than one occasion is enough to warrant the action, I'd think. This is also the second time that he directly asked a moderator to ban him (two different moderators), so I don't feel that badly about it.
So what if it's not tactful, I agreed with a lot of the arguments he put forth that he got called out on and didn't with some others, but not once did I think he was out of line. They were always valid arguments and was only aggressive for being challenged by a mod when another was in the wrong, i.e. Tank with his "En_route you seem to be under some strange misapprehension that I give a shit about your opinion" (http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=10105.msg175624#msg175624) reply then getting collared by McQ.
If someone threatens me with an action that was out of order in the first place I will challenge them on that and mods should be the ones that are challenged on their actions most of all.
There wasn't anything that even warranted the initial 7 day ban by Tank as it was a legit question (even though in the wrong section but why not just move it like in every other case) without any malice involved or that seemed like bullying in any form. Then when a mod does ban someone everyone then crowds around the mod as if they are the hard kid in the playground. Pathetic.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 08:43:52 PM
Then when a mod does ban someone everyone then crowds around the mod as if they are the hard kid in the playground. Pathetic.
That's a little much, don't you think? We might legitimately agree with the banning, if not necessarily for the reason the mod did it. I'd have banned En_Route myself after that "go ahead, ban me" crap and I liked En_Route's posts. Everybody past their teens should have learned not to ask for anything they don't actually want, and if they
do want it then what's the problem?
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 08:57:32 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 08:43:52 PM
Then when a mod does ban someone everyone then crowds around the mod as if they are the hard kid in the playground. Pathetic.
That's a little much, don't you think?
Not really, as that's what I think. I was ashamed of myself when I did it with Egor and never intend to do it again, the banning was either justified and doesn't need any comment or it's a mod swinging there dick about (or my perception of it at least) and therefore worth a comment.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 08:57:32 PM
I'd have banned En_Route myself after that "go ahead, ban me" crap and I liked En_Route's posts. Everybody past their teens should have learned not to ask for anything they don't actually want, and if they do want it then what's the problem?
When the mods have said prior that they won't ban anyone even if they ask for it, they will only ban them for breaking the rules, which he didn't. If he did bully SD then point it out to me because I certainly can't see it.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 09:07:04 PM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 08:57:32 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 08:43:52 PM
Then when a mod does ban someone everyone then crowds around the mod as if they are the hard kid in the playground. Pathetic.
That's a little much, don't you think?
Not really, as that's what I think. I was ashamed of myself when I did it with Egor and never intend to do it again, the banning was either justified and doesn't need any comment or it's a mod swinging there dick about (or my perception of it at least) and therefore worth a comment.
I'd rather you didn't call me pathetic. I think that both Tank and En_route have acted poorly towards each other in the past. I don't think I'm "crowding around" anyone, simply stating that, all things being considered, I think the ban was justified in the end. If En_route was able to defend his position without name calling or playing the passive-aggressive "go ahead and ban me" route (twice), I'd agree that banning him would be completely uncalled for. But we do have civility rules here, whether anyone likes them or not, and I think he consistently violated them far more than any moderator.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 09:35:23 PM
I'd rather you didn't call me pathetic. I think that both Tank and En_route have acted poorly towards each other in the past. I don't think I'm "crowding around" anyone, simply stating that, all things being considered, I think the ban was justified in the end. If En_route was able to defend his position without name calling or playing the passive-aggressive "go ahead and ban me" route (twice), I'd agree that banning him would be completely uncalled for. But we do have civility rules here, whether anyone likes them or not, and I think he consistently violated them far more than any moderator.
I wasn't calling anyone pathetic, just that gang mentality which is easy to get caught up in without realising.
Point out which civility rules he broke apart from the stuff with McQ.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 08:18:47 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 08, 2012, 08:08:16 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:57:39 PM
Quote from: Guardian85 on July 08, 2012, 07:39:14 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 07:26:26 PM
Why was En_Route banned?
Why is there always drama when I'm working the graveyard shift?
No idea but I checked out the so called offense which got En_Route banned and seems like a load of bull shit to me.
*nods in agreement then quickly runs away*
Ordinarily, I would agree as well but when someone actually, literally, asks to be banned I don't have a problem with them then getting banned. I realize it's just a show of bravado but that "go ahead, ban me!" thing just ticks me off.
En-route's ripostes were petulant and childish. In the comfort of my own objectivity I can understand an argument that says that Tank should rise above it. But I can't honestly say I'd have been disciplined and objective enough to act any differently had it been aimed at me. That's not to say I wholeheartedly agree with Tanks actions, more that with his responsibilities he has a duty to be a bigger man than I could be.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 09:44:18 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 09:35:23 PM
I'd rather you didn't call me pathetic. I think that both Tank and En_route have acted poorly towards each other in the past. I don't think I'm "crowding around" anyone, simply stating that, all things being considered, I think the ban was justified in the end. If En_route was able to defend his position without name calling or playing the passive-aggressive "go ahead and ban me" route (twice), I'd agree that banning him would be completely uncalled for. But we do have civility rules here, whether anyone likes them or not, and I think he consistently violated them far more than any moderator.
I wasn't calling anyone pathetic, just that gang mentality which is easy to get caught up in without realising.
Point out which civility rules he broke apart from the stuff with McQ.
I'm not a moderator, so I don't get to make the calls on what's "civilized", but this was his response to McQ who said that ER was acting belligerent with "even him".
Quote"Even with me". You need to get over yourself.Now exercise the power that obviously gives you such a thrill, and lends you that sense of importance which it is safe to assume is lacking elsewhere in your life, and exclude me from your charmed circle.
Then he got on with his "ban me" nonsense, which ended in a stalemate. But not before he went to the "true or false" thread (completely unrelated to any of the disagreements), where posted the following.
QuoteNo, but I have grown tired of being patronised by some self-important third-raters (you know who you are).
I don't see why either of those situations required him to get personal and, frankly, that combined with his apparent inability to ever let anyone else get the last word doesn't give me the most sympathy for him. I do agree that Tank probably had a pretty short fuse with him last going off, and the merit of his responses are debatable but, like Siz, I don't know if I would have had much more restraint if I was in his place. Actually, when En_route and I got into it a few months ago, I pm'd Tank and asked him to keep me accountable because I was afraid I might start saying something uncivil/that I'd regret. Tank's response to me wasn't "Oh yeah, I like you better! Fuck that guy!" It was a very reasonable "you guys probably won't agree on this issue, try to calm down, etc."
After all of this happened, I did come to kind of like En_route and I'm not jumping up and down with joy to see him go. I just don't see what else could have happened if he was unwilling to change how he handles conflict.
EDIT: Changed "forum" to "thread" after first quote, sorry to mislead.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 09:44:18 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 09:35:23 PM
I'd rather you didn't call me pathetic. I think that both Tank and En_route have acted poorly towards each other in the past. I don't think I'm "crowding around" anyone, simply stating that, all things being considered, I think the ban was justified in the end. If En_route was able to defend his position without name calling or playing the passive-aggressive "go ahead and ban me" route (twice), I'd agree that banning him would be completely uncalled for. But we do have civility rules here, whether anyone likes them or not, and I think he consistently violated them far more than any moderator.
I wasn't calling anyone pathetic, just that gang mentality which is easy to get caught up in without realising.
Point out which civility rules he broke apart from the stuff with McQ.
"You are a sad little man xxxx"
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 10:02:59 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 09:44:18 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 09:35:23 PM
I'd rather you didn't call me pathetic. I think that both Tank and En_route have acted poorly towards each other in the past. I don't think I'm "crowding around" anyone, simply stating that, all things being considered, I think the ban was justified in the end. If En_route was able to defend his position without name calling or playing the passive-aggressive "go ahead and ban me" route (twice), I'd agree that banning him would be completely uncalled for. But we do have civility rules here, whether anyone likes them or not, and I think he consistently violated them far more than any moderator.
I wasn't calling anyone pathetic, just that gang mentality which is easy to get caught up in without realising.
Point out which civility rules he broke apart from the stuff with McQ.
I'm not a moderator, so I don't get to make the calls on what's "civilized", but this was his response to McQ who said that ER was acting belligerent with "even him".
Quote"Even with me". You need to get over yourself.Now exercise the power that obviously gives you such a thrill, and lends you that sense of importance which it is safe to assume is lacking elsewhere in your life, and exclude me from your charmed circle.
Then he got on with his "ban me" nonsense, which ended in a stalemate. But not before he went to the "true or false" forum (completely unrelated to any of the disagreements), where posted the following.
QuoteNo, but I have grown tired of being patronised by some self-important third-raters (you know who you are).
I don't see why either of those situations required him to get personal and, frankly, that combined with his apparent inability to ever let anyone else get the last word doesn't give me the most sympathy for him. I do agree that Tank probably had a pretty short fuse with him last going off, and the merit of his responses are debatable but, like Siz, I don't know if I would have had much more restraint if I was in his place. Actually, when En_route and I got into it a few months ago, I pm'd Tank and asked him to keep me accountable because I was afraid I might start saying something uncivil/that I'd regret. Tank's response to me wasn't "Oh yeah, I like you better! Fuck that guy!" It was a very reasonable "you guys probably won't agree on this issue, try to calm down, etc."
After all of this happened, I did come to kind of like En_route and I'm not jumping up and down with joy to see him go. I just don't see what else could have happened if he was unwilling to change how he handles conflict.
So he'd been slagging of the staff here on another forum?
Oops! Thread! thread! No, it was here.
In the "true and false" thread. Sorry about that.
I'm a bit surprised at this actually. Isn't a permanent ban a bit much? :-\
Though En Route was a bit annoying in some threads, his posts were valid contributions IMO.
I also find it very annoying that he added the "go ahead, ban me" comment. If someone wants to just leave, just leave. But to make a mod ban you is a little like seeking some weird form of martyrdom that I find so annoying. ::)
I'm just annoyed today. ::)
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 10:20:39 PM
Oops! Thread! thread! No, it was here.
In the "true and false" thread. Sorry about that.
Ah! Ok.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 09:07:04 PM
When the mods have said prior that they won't ban anyone even if they ask for it, they will only ban them for breaking the rules, which he didn't. If he did bully SD then point it out to me because I certainly can't see it.
I don't want to get caught up in a pointless argument (tho that does seem to be in my nature) but I'll try to clear up the "ban me" reaction since DJ already handled the "pathetic" remark.
I know the moderators don't ban people just because they ask for it, and I think that's a good rule. However, somebody literally asking to be banned does cause me, as a bystander, to lose sympathy for their position. That's probably unfair on my part, but there it is.
For the record, I did not consider En_Route's question bullying and frankly, I would have liked to have seen an answer to it. Also for the record, I do think he acted like enough of an ass to be banned.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 11:03:57 PM
For the record, I did not consider En_Route's question bullying and frankly, I would have liked to have seen an answer to it.
I agree with this, too.
DJ (sorry for not quoting)
If you look at all the times E_R became uncivil it was due to him getting mod warnings for something when he didn't break any rules, unless the civility rules for some reason prevent asking questions and challenging other opinions. I'm not using this to justify the responses but at times has seemed like baiting. The point I am trying to make is that when E_R has been flagged up in mod mode it has been for unfair reasons especially when others have made downright racist and bigoted comments that have never been flagged up by mods. The civility rules only seem to be enforced when they suit people and this always seems to coincide when a mod disagrees with a member, or the civility rules apply to some and not others.
Quote from: Crow on July 08, 2012, 11:06:39 PM
DJ (sorry for not quoting)
If you look at all the times E_R became uncivil it was due to him getting mod warnings for something when he didn't break any rules, unless the civility rules for some reason prevent asking questions and challenging other opinions. I'm not using this to justify the responses but at times has seemed like baiting. The point I am trying to make is that when E_R has been flagged up in mod mode it has been for unfair reasons especially when others have made downright racist and bigoted comments that have never been flagged up by mods. The civility rules only seem to be enforced when they suit people and this always seems to coincide when a mod disagrees with a member, or the civility rules apply to some and not others.
I think you have a valid point, but it still becomes a question on how best to handle un-fair treatment. Should people be allowed to act however they like if they're not being treated fairly? If the mods are being inconsistent, and we're bothered by it, shouldn't we point out those circumstances rather than getting personal with each other?
Again, for instance, when ER and I were arguing, a mod came in and told us BOTH to knock it off. So I did. I left the thread and didn't post again. ER just could NOT seem to do this. He kept posting, started directing his posts to people in a personal manner (he compared us to theists, I think) and wouldn't stop until he got the last word in (which he did).
If you have an issue with how some things are done here, I think that's valid, but I just really have a hard time feeling like he was a victim in all of this. ETA: Also, personally, I can't really think of another member who acted uncivil (got personally insulting with another poster) and wasn't reprimanded for it because of a mod's personal feelings. Maybe it happened, but I can't really think of any?
Dang, twas enjoying having another person around that understands amoralism.
For the most part I enjoyed En Route's posts. But he did ask for the ban, so he got it.
I don't think there was any benefit from making a personal insult onto tank.
That skirmish escalated way too quickly though.
After a while the whole thing does sound a bit funny.
"Go ahead. Ban me if you dare."
Slow realization that the growing shadow on the floor surrounding him is Tank's Ban Hammer closing in.
No, Wai-!
Ploft.
Quote from: Stevil on July 08, 2012, 11:17:45 PM
Dang, twas enjoying having another person around that understands amoralism.
For the most part I enjoyed En Route's posts. But he did ask for the ban, so he got it.
I don't think there was any benefit from making a personal insult onto tank.
That skirmish escalated way too quickly though.
I read every new post here every day (I can't be the only one) and have done since I joined. Sometimes it just comes down to pattern recognition. 95% of ER posts were fine, but he was regularly pushing his luck with low level personal attacks, passive aggressive nastiness and low level bullying more and more. Maybe I did load the gun, maybe I did hand it to him, but he chose to pulled the trigger. If he had had any respect for the rest of the forum and it's members he'd have taken the point I made and rephrased his question and carried on. As it was he didn't so he's gone. He knew he was gone when he made the "Go on. Ban me." comment. He didn't do that for any good reason.
Sorry to have shot your debate partner.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on July 08, 2012, 11:28:33 PM
After a while the whole thing does sound a bit funny.
"Go ahead. Ban me if you dare."
Slow realization that the growing shadow on the floor surrounding him is Tank's Ban Hammer closing in.
No, Wai-!
Ploft.
I can't stand passive aggressive bullying in real life and I sure as hell am not going to put up with it here; it's about as uncivil as one can get.
I once had an employee threaten to resign if I didn't give them their increment in salary. I wrote the date on a piece of paper and "I resign (name of person)" on it and gave it to them with the pen and asked them to sign it. They didn't.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 11:14:32 PM
I think you have a valid point, but it still becomes a question on how best to handle un-fair treatment. Should people be allowed to act however they like if they're not being treated fairly? If the mods are being inconsistent, and we're bothered by it, shouldn't we point out those circumstances rather than getting personal with each other?
Again, for instance, when ER and I were arguing, a mod came in and told us BOTH to knock it off. So I did. I left the thread and didn't post again. ER just could NOT seem to do this. He kept posting, started directing his posts to people in a personal manner (he compared us to theists, I think) and wouldn't stop until he got the last word in (which he did).
If you have an issue with how some things are done here, I think that's valid, but I just really have a hard time feeling like he was a victim in all of this. ETA: Also, personally, I can't really think of another member who acted uncivil (got personally insulting with another poster) and wasn't reprimanded for it because of a mod's personal feelings. Maybe it happened, but I can't really think of any?
I'm not getting personal with anyone, I hope it doesn't come across that way. Nor do I think E_R was a victim as he would have got banned sooner or later but at least if it was for something similar to the example you highlighted then it would have been properly justified, rather than something that seemed incorrect and well out of proportion in the first instance and second an impulse decision that is against what other mods have said previously.
No, I didn't mean you were getting personal :). I meant ER (because I'm sure he did think he was getting treated unfairly).
Quote from: CrowNor do I think E_R was a victim as he would have got banned sooner or later but at least if it was for something similar to the example you highlighted then it would have been properly justified, rather than something that seemed incorrect and well out of proportion in the first instance and second an impulse decision that is against what other mods have said previously.
Yeah, I don't disagree.
Quote from: Asmodean on July 09, 2012, 12:04:51 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 08, 2012, 11:53:43 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 11:46:17 PM
Good night all. Off to bed. Don't burn the place down on my account ;D
Haha, I've got to head off, too. I will have no part in HAF-burning ;D
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.myopera.com%2Fdebplatt%2Fsmiley%2Foh-my.png&hash=b103206c5ba6db8a10d78f398f4ab6f37cac0aa4)
...
... ...
... (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.myopera.com%2Fdebplatt%2Fsmiley%2Fangel-wanna-be.gif&hash=324d2b3cdb42f52c0741cc830925bb21d3e579b8)
What? Is that because I've already responded to a bunch of this?
I can't help it, I have a chronic need to add my two cents. :P
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 11:03:57 PM
I know the moderators don't ban people just because they ask for it, and I think that's a good rule. However, somebody literally asking to be banned does cause me, as a bystander, to lose sympathy for their position. That's probably unfair on my part, but there it is.
Me too. It irks me when theists play the martyr card, and it irked me when ER dared McQ to ban him the first time. He won then, tried again with Tank and got what he asked for. The third or fourth time he would've pulled that off would've made him more of a bore than an aggravation. ::)
Though I think the place is at a slight loss with him gone (I can't help it, I liked his writing style and his contributions when he wasn't locking horns to dispute forum space with people or get the last word in)
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on July 08, 2012, 11:28:33 PM
Ploft.
Somehow I imagine the ban hammer sounding louder than that.
Ploft suggests being hit with a pillow.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 09, 2012, 02:51:37 AM
Somehow I imagine the ban hammer sounding louder than that. Ploft suggests being hit with a pillow.
Silent but violent!
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FPZr0B.jpg&hash=ac251a16ab0ead0c978963571b09854b060f50dd)
You didn't have to squash his hat.
The Ban Hammer can defy expectation ;D
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on July 09, 2012, 01:23:14 AM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 08, 2012, 11:03:57 PM
I know the moderators don't ban people just because they ask for it, and I think that's a good rule. However, somebody literally asking to be banned does cause me, as a bystander, to lose sympathy for their position. That's probably unfair on my part, but there it is.
Me too. It irks me when theists play the martyr card, and it irked me when ER dared McQ to ban him the first time. He won then, tried again with Tank and got what he asked for. The third or fourth time he would've pulled that off would've made him more of a bore than an aggravation. ::)
Though I think the place is at a slight loss with him gone (I can't help it, I liked his writing style and his contributions when he wasn't locking horns to dispute forum space with people or get the last word in)
I essentially agree with this. But the problem is that 'barrack room lawyers' can ham-sting the staff of a forum and that's EXACTLY what EH was trying to do. For the most part this place runs fairly smoothly. But I have seen 3 large forums implode where the staff didn't have the courage to do what was needed. There is another one where the staff spend 75% of their time arguing with belligerent members about how this rule and that rule should be applied under this circumstance or that circumstance. And frankly I haven't got enough life left to go through that sort of shit.
EH was determined to get SD to admit she was wrong
and not do it in a reasoned and reasonable fashion, he was attempting to shoot her down with loaded questions,that is not civil and not the way this forum will be. He would have done it to all of us at some point and that would have been very bad for a small community like this.
I knew when I banned him I was going to get some flak because mods almost always do get flak when they have to remove a member that most of the time was entertaining and reasonable.
When ER and I started debating the morality issues, he actually PM'd me a very nice note saying how much he enjoyed our debates even though we disagreed. Later, when he and Tank/McQ were arguing, we also PM'd, and I encouraged him to talk to them privately. I had hoped things would calm down after that. I did enjoy having him around, but I don't disagree with the ban. He was unacceptably aggressive at times, especially towards the mods.
So Tank, I agree with your ban. That being said, with all due respect, when you and ER fought on the Diamond Jubilee thread, I thought your aggressiveness towards him was not appropriate either, and could give the appearance that it was personal. I know it wasn't, but frankly your stature and position on this forum means your words carry more weight, and that did bother me.
Quote from: Firebird on July 09, 2012, 02:13:03 PM
When ER and I started debating the morality issues, he actually PM'd me a very nice note saying how much he enjoyed our debates even though we disagreed. Later, when he and Tank/McQ were arguing, we also PM'd, and I encouraged him to talk to them privately. I had hoped things would calm down after that. I did enjoy having him around, but I don't disagree with the ban. He was unacceptably aggressive at times, especially towards the mods.
So Tank, I agree with your ban. That being said, with all due respect, when you and ER fought on the Diamond Jubilee thread, I thought your aggressiveness towards him was not appropriate either, and could give the appearance that it was personal. I know it wasn't, but frankly your stature and position on this forum means your words carry more weight, and that did bother me.
That's a fair point. Mia Culpa.
But having lived through 'The Troubles' I have no sympathy for anybody that supports/supported or attempts to white wash what those murdering bastards did. Intelligent my fucking arse.
I apologise for losing my rag over that.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 02:29:21 PM
Quote from: Firebird on July 09, 2012, 02:13:03 PM
When ER and I started debating the morality issues, he actually PM'd me a very nice note saying how much he enjoyed our debates even though we disagreed. Later, when he and Tank/McQ were arguing, we also PM'd, and I encouraged him to talk to them privately. I had hoped things would calm down after that. I did enjoy having him around, but I don't disagree with the ban. He was unacceptably aggressive at times, especially towards the mods.
So Tank, I agree with your ban. That being said, with all due respect, when you and ER fought on the Diamond Jubilee thread, I thought your aggressiveness towards him was not appropriate either, and could give the appearance that it was personal. I know it wasn't, but frankly your stature and position on this forum means your words carry more weight, and that did bother me.
That's a fair point. Mia Culpa.
But having lived through 'The Troubles' I have no sympathy for anybody that supports/supported or attempts to white wash what those murdering bastards did. Intelligent my fucking arse.
I apologise for losing my rag over that.
Appreciate that, and much respect too. And I don't fault you at all for feeling offended.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 02:29:21 PM
That's a fair point. Mia Culpa.
But having lived through 'The Troubles' I have no sympathy for anybody that supports/supported or attempts to white wash what those murdering bastards did. Intelligent my fucking arse.
I apologise for losing my rag over that.
His opinion is fair, not one that agreed with but it is also the same opinion as my Irish mates, they view them in a similar vein as the George Washington and Napoleon. I wonder how our American friends would feel if we called Mr Washigton a "murdering bastard" and a "fucking idiot". There isn't much different between the two situations either.
But anyway no point in flogging a dead horse.
Quote from: Crow on July 09, 2012, 04:58:43 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 02:29:21 PM
That's a fair point. Mia Culpa.
But having lived through 'The Troubles' I have no sympathy for anybody that supports/supported or attempts to white wash what those murdering bastards did. Intelligent my fucking arse.
I apologise for losing my rag over that.
His opinion is fair, not one that agreed with but it is also the same opinion as my Irish mates, they view them in a similar vein as the George Washington and Napoleon. I wonder how our American friends would feel if we called Mr Washigton a "murdering bastard" and a "fucking idiot". There isn't much different between the two situations either.
But anyway no point in flogging a dead horse.
I get that...where my parents are from pioneering rangers are seen as real heroes of the State, but in reality they were vicious enslavers of indigenous populations. Wild people. One was even named after a demon by the indians. The whole thing sounds rather weird to someone who isn't from that state to hear them glorify their personal characterisitcs.
And I also don't want to resurrect that dead topic because it's clearly a sensitive one, but I just thought I'd mention that whether it's intelligent or not is besides the point. Terrorism is a tactic within a greater strategic context, and can actually be an intelligent way of reaching a goal. It's sad that the people usually targeted are civilians just trying to get on with their lives, but it's about monstrosity and not intelligence.
And Tank, I'm not giving you flak because you gave ER what, like Sweetdeath said, he was literally asking for. I was just surprised I guess. I haven't seen too many bannings of people who didn't start of as obvious trolls here.
I didn't think that his original comment towards SD was "bullying." I also agree that I have seen members make racist and otherwise nasty comments without a single word from the mods which makes me feel...I don't know, like it's somehow acceptable to do so. Don't get me wrong, I don't really want a forum where every word out of someone's mouth is moderated, but when someone is allowed to make repeated racist comments and not hear a word from the mods, and someone else gets modslapped for asking a pointed question, it makes it seem like business as usual, it's okay to hate on certain people but not others.
But, the whole "ban me" nonsense and calling Tank "a sad little man" really painted Tank into a corner where it was ban him or put up with nonsense like that going forward, so I don't blame Tank for banning him. I will miss E_R though, I liked him.
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 04:25:22 PM
Why don't you ask an open question that might shed light on the situation rather than repeat a loaded question obviously intended to bully a fellow member?
Oh and don't try the passive aggressive line you pulled last time the "Go ahead ban me" routine.
Do that I'll ban you.
Tank
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 05:45:14 PM
I had missed the first post where En-Route decided to push his luck.
Thus I was happy to let it go at a 7 day suspension.
Having now seen the "Go Ahead. Ban Me." comment I have extended the ban to a permanent.
Tank
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 11:35:09 PM
I read every new post here every day (I can't be the only one) and have done since I joined. Sometimes it just comes down to pattern recognition. 95% of ER posts were fine, but he was regularly pushing his luck with low level personal attacks, passive aggressive nastiness and low level bullying more and more. Maybe I did load the gun, maybe I did hand it to him, but he chose to pulled the trigger. If he had had any respect for the rest of the forum and it's members he'd have taken the point I made and rephrased his question and carried on. As it was he didn't so he's gone. He knew he was gone when he made the "Go on. Ban me." comment. He didn't do that for any good reason.
Sorry to have shot your debate partner.
I will only say this for now. I'm in total and complete disagreement.
Quote from: Ali on July 09, 2012, 06:57:00 PM
I didn't think that his original comment towards SD was "bullying." I also agree that I have seen members make racist and otherwise nasty comments without a single word from the mods which makes me feel...I don't know, like it's somehow acceptable to do so. Don't get me wrong, I don't really want a forum where every word out of someone's mouth is moderated, but when someone is allowed to make repeated racist comments and not hear a word from the mods, and someone else gets modslapped for asking a pointed question, it makes it seem like business as usual, it's okay to hate on certain people but not others.
But, the whole "ban me" nonsense and calling Tank "a sad little man" really painted Tank into a corner where it was ban him or put up with nonsense like that going forward, so I don't blame Tank for banning him. I will miss E_R though, I liked him.
Did you report the posts with the racist comments in them?
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 09, 2012, 06:57:00 PM
I didn't think that his original comment towards SD was "bullying." I also agree that I have seen members make racist and otherwise nasty comments without a single word from the mods which makes me feel...I don't know, like it's somehow acceptable to do so. Don't get me wrong, I don't really want a forum where every word out of someone's mouth is moderated, but when someone is allowed to make repeated racist comments and not hear a word from the mods, and someone else gets modslapped for asking a pointed question, it makes it seem like business as usual, it's okay to hate on certain people but not others.
But, the whole "ban me" nonsense and calling Tank "a sad little man" really painted Tank into a corner where it was ban him or put up with nonsense like that going forward, so I don't blame Tank for banning him. I will miss E_R though, I liked him.
Did you report the posts with the racist comments in them?
No, that's true, I did not. It's never occurred to me to report a comment, I just assumed that if the mods saw them and cared to say anything they would.
Quote from: Ali on July 09, 2012, 07:03:34 PM
No, that's true, I did not. It's never occurred to me to report a comment, I just assumed that if the mods saw them and cared to say anything they would.
Nuff said.
Quote from: Ali on July 09, 2012, 07:03:34 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 09, 2012, 06:57:00 PM
I didn't think that his original comment towards SD was "bullying." I also agree that I have seen members make racist and otherwise nasty comments without a single word from the mods which makes me feel...I don't know, like it's somehow acceptable to do so. Don't get me wrong, I don't really want a forum where every word out of someone's mouth is moderated, but when someone is allowed to make repeated racist comments and not hear a word from the mods, and someone else gets modslapped for asking a pointed question, it makes it seem like business as usual, it's okay to hate on certain people but not others.
But, the whole "ban me" nonsense and calling Tank "a sad little man" really painted Tank into a corner where it was ban him or put up with nonsense like that going forward, so I don't blame Tank for banning him. I will miss E_R though, I liked him.
Did you report the posts with the racist comments in them?
No, that's true, I did not. It's never occurred to me to report a comment, I just assumed that if the mods saw them and cared to say anything they would.
If a mod did see it they would do something. We don't get to read everything in the detail we would like. :)
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 11:35:09 PM
I read every new post here every day (I can't be the only one) and have done since I joined.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:09:35 PM
If a mod did see it they would do something. We don't get to read everything in the detail we would like. :)
Hmm.
To be honest the civility rule confuses me a little. Are we technically allowed to vent frustrations at generalized groups of people every once in a while or is there more of a problem when one poster targets another and personally attacks that person here.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 07:20:28 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 11:35:09 PM
I read every new post here every day (I can't be the only one) and have done since I joined.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:09:35 PM
If a mod did see it they would do something. We don't get to read everything in the detail we would like. :)
Hmm.
You're point?
AD, :). I was going to leave that alone. Look, Tank, mod team in general: I know you're just fellow members, and it's all a judgement call. I don't blame you for not wanting to jump on every off color comment; I don't think I would enjoy a forum that heavily modded anyway. Just....next time someone says something racist, do me a favor and pop them in the face for me, h'okay? :)
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:39:15 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 07:20:28 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 11:35:09 PM
I read every new post here every day (I can't be the only one) and have done since I joined.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:09:35 PM
If a mod did see it they would do something. We don't get to read everything in the detail we would like. :)
Hmm.
You're point?
The point was made already, but you missed it or chose to ignore it.
BTW...to whomever cares, if any, I also disagree with this being dumped into the "Dump Pile of Crazy Troll Posts" as it is not crazy nor a troll post.
Quote from: En_Route (Banned) on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
If we are being open and honest, hopefully without the threat of the ban hammer being swung on ourselves, I would have to say that the above was certainly not warning worthy, we all call each other out on contradictions or try to reword something based on how we understood something to "mean". I understand it can appear obnoxious but everyone has a different style, some people have high EQ like Ali and DeterminedJuliet whom always come across as very nice pleasant people (whom you want to have conversation with) others may come across as too blunt, too grating, people with low EQ like myself :)
I don't think it is a moderator's place to change people, to make them into high EQ. Sometimes blunt and to the point is necessary, sometimes it is not, but people are who they are. As long as we aren't getting personal, calling names, being racist, sexist or insensitive to people's situation then just let people be please.
SD was fine, I don't think she was overly worried about ER's comment. I can understand ER's over the top response if he felt unreasonably treated by the threat of the mod hammer.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 08:19:11 PMBTW...to whomever cares, if any, I also disagree with this being dumped into the "Dump Pile of Crazy Troll Posts" as it is not crazy nor a troll post.
That would have been my doing. Which section do you consider more appropriate?
Quote from: Recusant on July 09, 2012, 09:14:48 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 08:19:11 PMBTW...to whomever cares, if any, I also disagree with this being dumped into the "Dump Pile of Crazy Troll Posts" as it is not crazy nor a troll post.
That would have been my doing. Which section do you consider more appropriate?
We don't have ( nor am I suggesting to add ) a "moderating issues" type section as I certainly can understand how that can not be good for a forum. However, in this case ( and maybe others past and certainly some in the future ) there has to be some sort of place to put this so that 1.) It is removed from the thread it is taking OT and 2.) be given it's proper consideration rather than by placing it in the "dump of crazy troll posts" implying ( at least to me ) that it is not worthy of a discerning looksie.
I don't know exactly. The person banned has no manner in which to make a case among his/her peers. If we can be restricted at the beginning of our time at HAF to the "Getting to Know You" section up to 10 posts, then certainly a banned person can be restricted to an "arbitration" section of sorts. I know how I felt when I was banned twice with no manner to make my case nor the feeling of freedom to make my case without fear of more or permanent punishment.
Again, I don't know exactly. Just thinking out loud.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 08:14:30 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:39:15 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 07:20:28 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 08, 2012, 11:35:09 PM
I read every new post here every day (I can't be the only one) and have done since I joined.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 07:09:35 PM
If a mod did see it they would do something. We don't get to read everything in the detail we would like. :)
Hmm.
You're point?
The point was made already, but you missed it or chose to ignore it.
More goading AD, no surprise there then pretty much your only way of behaving when cornered isn't it?
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 09:30:41 PM
Quote from: Recusant on July 09, 2012, 09:14:48 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 08:19:11 PMBTW...to whomever cares, if any, I also disagree with this being dumped into the "Dump Pile of Crazy Troll Posts" as it is not crazy nor a troll post.
That would have been my doing. Which section do you consider more appropriate?
We don't have ( nor am I suggesting to add ) a "moderating issues" type section as I certainly can understand how that can not be good for a forum. However, in this case ( and maybe others past and certainly some in the future ) there has to be some sort of place to put this so that 1.) It is removed from the thread it is taking OT and 2.) be given it's proper consideration rather than by placing it in the "dump of crazy troll posts" implying ( at least to me ) that it is not worthy of a discerning looksie.
I don't know exactly. The person banned has no manner in which to make a case among his/her peers. If we can be restricted at the beginning of our time at HAF to the "Getting to Know You" section up to 10 posts, then certainly a banned person can be restricted to an "arbitration" section of sorts. I know how I felt when I was banned twice with no manner to make my case nor the feeling of freedom to make my case without fear of more or permanent punishment.
Again, I don't know exactly. Just thinking out loud.
And this is exactly the sort of barrack room arguments that brought down RDF. I'm sure you'd like that wouldn't you AD?
I think it might be a good idea tO lock this before someone says something they will regret.
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 09:33:59 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 09:30:41 PM
Quote from: Recusant on July 09, 2012, 09:14:48 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 08:19:11 PMBTW...to whomever cares, if any, I also disagree with this being dumped into the "Dump Pile of Crazy Troll Posts" as it is not crazy nor a troll post.
That would have been my doing. Which section do you consider more appropriate?
We don't have ( nor am I suggesting to add ) a "moderating issues" type section as I certainly can understand how that can not be good for a forum. However, in this case ( and maybe others past and certainly some in the future ) there has to be some sort of place to put this so that 1.) It is removed from the thread it is taking OT and 2.) be given it's proper consideration rather than by placing it in the "dump of crazy troll posts" implying ( at least to me ) that it is not worthy of a discerning looksie.
I don't know exactly. The person banned has no manner in which to make a case among his/her peers. If we can be restricted at the beginning of our time at HAF to the "Getting to Know You" section up to 10 posts, then certainly a banned person can be restricted to an "arbitration" section of sorts. I know how I felt when I was banned twice with no manner to make my case nor the feeling of freedom to make my case without fear of more or permanent punishment.
Again, I don't know exactly. Just thinking out loud.
And this is exactly the sort of barrack room arguments that brought down RDF. I'm sure you'd like that wouldn't you AD?
I'll refrain from what I actually started with.
No, Tank. It's not what I want at all. Thanks for your assertion though.
Quote from: Budhorse4 on July 09, 2012, 09:38:11 PM
I think it might be a good idea tO lock this before someone says something they will regret.
Yes, lock it and HAF will continue with the status quo.
As you observed, AnimatedDirt, there really isn't a good place for this sort of discussion here. I also agree that this thread doesn't belong in the "Dump Pile" sub-section.
I think that having a place which invites feedback and discussion is worth while, despite the "barracks lawyer" issue. This is not RDF, nor is it any of the other large fora which have had problems with obstreperous shit-disturbers.
For now, I've moved this thread to a sub-section with a less negative name, though I think that a sub-section devoted to discussions such as this one is a good idea. I also think that such discussions are healthy. This isn't a democracy, but neither is it a police state.
Quote from: Recusant on July 09, 2012, 10:13:42 PM
As you observed, AnimatedDirt, there really isn't a good place for this sort of discussion here. I also agree that this thread doesn't belong in the "Dump Pile" sub-section.
I think that having a place which invites feedback and discussion is worth while, despite the "barracks lawyer" issue. This is not RDF, nor is it any of the other large fora which have had problems with obstreperous shit-disturbers.
For now, I've moved this thread to a sub-section with a less negative name, though I think that a sub-section devoted to discussions such as this one is a good idea. I also think that such discussions are healthy. This isn't a democracy, but neither is it a police state.
Thank you. Appreciated. :)
Quote from: Stevil on July 09, 2012, 08:53:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route (Banned) on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
If we are being open and honest, hopefully without the threat of the ban hammer being swung on ourselves, I would have to say that the above was certainly not warning worthy, we all call each other out on contradictions or try to reword something based on how we understood something to "mean". I understand it can appear obnoxious but everyone has a different style, some people have high EQ like Ali and DeterminedJuliet whom always come across as very nice pleasant people (whom you want to have conversation with) others may come across as too blunt, too grating, people with low EQ like myself :)
I don't think it is a moderator's place to change people, to make them into high EQ. Sometimes blunt and to the point is necessary, sometimes it is not, but people are who they are. As long as we aren't getting personal, calling names, being racist, sexist or insensitive to people's situation then just let people be please.
SD was fine, I don't think she was overly worried about ER's comment. I can understand ER's over the top response if he felt unreasonably treated by the threat of the mod hammer.
Thanks for the complement. :)
I have no problem with bluntness, and I think members should be allowed to challenge each other's ideas, so long as it doesn't get too personal. Last going off, En_Route and I had pretty civilized disagreements in the "lying to children" thread, actually. So maybe there could have been some progress there, I dunno.
With regard to SD, as I said before, I didn't really consider what ER said to be bullying, per se, though, like AD, he tends to hide his "challenges" in cryptic, dance-around-it talk rather than a more direct approach. It can come across as intentionally passive-aggressive. Despite this, as much as I love SD, she does make some sweeping generalizations sometimes and I think it should be okay to challenge them.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 09, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Quote from: Stevil on July 09, 2012, 08:53:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route (Banned) on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
If we are being open and honest, hopefully without the threat of the ban hammer being swung on ourselves, I would have to say that the above was certainly not warning worthy, we all call each other out on contradictions or try to reword something based on how we understood something to "mean". I understand it can appear obnoxious but everyone has a different style, some people have high EQ like Ali and DeterminedJuliet whom always come across as very nice pleasant people (whom you want to have conversation with) others may come across as too blunt, too grating, people with low EQ like myself :)
I don't think it is a moderator's place to change people, to make them into high EQ. Sometimes blunt and to the point is necessary, sometimes it is not, but people are who they are. As long as we aren't getting personal, calling names, being racist, sexist or insensitive to people's situation then just let people be please.
SD was fine, I don't think she was overly worried about ER's comment. I can understand ER's over the top response if he felt unreasonably treated by the threat of the mod hammer.
Thanks for the complement. :)
I have no problem with bluntness, and I think members should be allowed to challenge each other's ideas, so long as it doesn't get too personal. Last going off, En_Route and I had pretty civilized disagreements in the "lying to children" thread, actually. So maybe there could have been some progress there, I dunno.
With regard to SD, as I said before, I didn't really consider what ER said to be bullying, per se, though, like AD, he tends to hide his "challenges" in cryptic, dance-around-it talk rather than a more direct approach. It can come across as intentionally passive-aggressive. Despite this, as much as I love SD, she does make some sweeping generalizations sometimes and I think it should be okay to challenge them.
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification? It seems to me that had he done this, the outcome would've been the same or worse. The problem, as Stevil mentions and I agree, is that this was not even warning-worthy, much less a permaban.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 09, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Quote from: Stevil on July 09, 2012, 08:53:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route (Banned) on July 08, 2012, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 08, 2012, 06:04:00 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 07, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 07, 2012, 08:25:50 PM
For the most part, i think some atheists can be rude only because we are fucking sick of religion being shoved into our face by law and pamphlets. :)
So when theists behave badly it's the fault of religion and when atheists behave badly...it's also the fault of religion.
More like the fault of annoying ass people.
I'll reformulate: When religious people act badly, it's the fault of religion and when atheists act badly it's the fault of religious people.
If we are being open and honest, hopefully without the threat of the ban hammer being swung on ourselves, I would have to say that the above was certainly not warning worthy, we all call each other out on contradictions or try to reword something based on how we understood something to "mean". I understand it can appear obnoxious but everyone has a different style, some people have high EQ like Ali and DeterminedJuliet whom always come across as very nice pleasant people (whom you want to have conversation with) others may come across as too blunt, too grating, people with low EQ like myself :)
I don't think it is a moderator's place to change people, to make them into high EQ. Sometimes blunt and to the point is necessary, sometimes it is not, but people are who they are. As long as we aren't getting personal, calling names, being racist, sexist or insensitive to people's situation then just let people be please.
SD was fine, I don't think she was overly worried about ER's comment. I can understand ER's over the top response if he felt unreasonably treated by the threat of the mod hammer.
Thanks for the complement. :)
I have no problem with bluntness, and I think members should be allowed to challenge each other's ideas, so long as it doesn't get too personal. Last going off, En_Route and I had pretty civilized disagreements in the "lying to children" thread, actually. So maybe there could have been some progress there, I dunno.
With regard to SD, as I said before, I didn't really consider what ER said to be bullying, per se, though, like AD, he tends to hide his "challenges" in cryptic, dance-around-it talk rather than a more direct approach. It can come across as intentionally passive-aggressive. Despite this, as much as I love SD, she does make some sweeping generalizations sometimes and I think it should be okay to challenge them.
Agreed.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 10:30:11 PM
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification?
Tank does a great job for the most part. He does it out of love and passion for this community. I seriously don't think he gets paid.
So much effort from him especially and the other mods, this is a fantasic place because of this.
Sometimes mods get caught up in the emotion too, they are not robots, and sometimes they act imperectly, they are not "Jesus" or Mr Perfect (for those oldies that used to watch WWF).
On the whole Tank is superb.
Many people aren't cut out to be mods, it is only a special few that can do such a great job.
Quote from: Stevil on July 09, 2012, 10:48:04 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 10:30:11 PM
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification?
Tank does a great job for the most part. He does it out of love and passion for this community. I seriously don't think he gets paid.
So much effort from him especially and the other mods, this is a fantasic place because of this.
Agreed. I've mentioned many times that I love this place too. It has a bunch of people that frankly I wouldn't mind spending time with IRL.
Quote from: StevilSometimes mods get caught up in the emotion too, they are not robots, and sometimes they act imperectly, they are not "Jesus" or Mr Perfect (for those oldies that used to watch WWF).
On the whole Tank is superb.
Many people aren't cut out to be mods, it is only a special few that can do such a great job.
I respect your opinion.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 10:30:11 PM
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification?
Nope, I'd just rather, if you're trying to "get at" something that you just say it rather than dance around it. If you dance around it and someone is already annoyed, then they assume the worst anyway. If ER felt like SD was setting a double standard, it would have been better, I think, if he had directly said, "when you say ________ it sounds like a double standard to me." Then she can either defend her position or agree and apologize. If you pose a bunch of round-about loaded questions, it's frustrating, not clear as to what you're trying to get at and someone's more likely to take it personally. Clarification is always good, but I think it'd be better if posters expressed their thoughts in a way that required as little clarification as possible.
EDIT: I was talking about the person posting originally being blunt, not the mod or whoever being blunt. Is that what you meant? haha, see, I'm not even sure who the "person" you're referring to is upon a second read.
I thought I would just take the time to clarify a few points as I think Tank (and others) might have taken what I wrote as an attack against him. That was not what I was trying to convey I was purely challenging a decision that I disagreed with, a style of moderation that I had a problem with, and in my opinion was a bad decision that needed clarifying and appeared (still does in my honest opinion) to have been swayed by personal opinions rather than an objective decision.
I appreciate all the work Tank puts into this site and is understandable that he and others might get a bit personally involved but if I think something is wrong I am not going to keep quite, from the look of it I wasn't the only one that had a problem with recent mod decisions, I would have normally taken my grievances to the person in question in private but seeing as that doesn't actually achieve anything, as I found out you just get a my decision was right and I am the mod you are not and this was more of the same behavior I thought it was worth bringing up to be discussed.
If you can't challenge a mod on there personal opinions without them either stonewalling you (which I have seen others been banned for in my brief time here) or reverting into mod mode then whats the point of the mod being involved in a debate in the first place? A mod should be warned the same just as other members, maybe they were but unless its to do with "official business" why not do it in public like the others?
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 09, 2012, 11:19:20 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 10:30:11 PM
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification?
Nope, I'd just rather, if you're trying to "get at" something that you just say it rather than dance around it. If you dance around it and someone is already annoyed, then they assume the worst anyway. If ER felt like SD was setting a double standard, it would have been better, I think, if he had directly said, "when you say ________ it sounds like a double standard to me." Then she can either defend her position or agree and apologize. If you pose a bunch of round-about loaded questions, it's frustrating, not clear as to what you're trying to get at and someone's more likely to take it personally. Clarification is always good, but I think it'd be better if posters expressed their thoughts in a way that required as little clarification as possible.
To me it did seem blunt and getting 'right to it' by going to the logical conclusion in a question form. But I'm prone to being wrong.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 11:25:43 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 09, 2012, 11:19:20 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 10:30:11 PM
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification?
Nope, I'd just rather, if you're trying to "get at" something that you just say it rather than dance around it. If you dance around it and someone is already annoyed, then they assume the worst anyway. If ER felt like SD was setting a double standard, it would have been better, I think, if he had directly said, "when you say ________ it sounds like a double standard to me." Then she can either defend her position or agree and apologize. If you pose a bunch of round-about loaded questions, it's frustrating, not clear as to what you're trying to get at and someone's more likely to take it personally. Clarification is always good, but I think it'd be better if posters expressed their thoughts in a way that required as little clarification as possible.
To me it did seem blunt and getting 'right to it' by going to the logical conclusion in a question form. But I'm prone to being wrong.
The Socratic method isn't exactly known for its directness.
Quote from: Stevil on July 09, 2012, 10:48:04 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on July 09, 2012, 10:30:11 PM
It sounds, DJ, that you'd rather a person be blunt and assume the worst and REACT to that instead of asking a question for clarification?
Tank does a great job for the most part. He does it out of love and passion for this community. I seriously don't think he gets paid.
So much effort from him especially and the other mods, this is a fantasic place because of this.
Sometimes mods get caught up in the emotion too, they are not robots, and sometimes they act imperectly, they are not "Jesus" or Mr Perfect (for those oldies that used to watch WWF).
On the whole Tank is superb.
Many people aren't cut out to be mods, it is only a special few that can do such a great job.
.
This. Tank you have always done a great job as a staff member no matter where that has been. You always have the welfare of the community as a whole in mind. I appreciate what you bring to this community and the time and effort you put into it. *hugs*
I know I may be beating a dead horse here, but the more I read this, the more Tank's accusation of bullying bothers me. Was ER really bullying SD? Yes, perhaps being a bit blunt and argumentative, but I have seen worse on this forum and not considered it report-worthy. His response to Tank was ban-worthy, certainly. I find this whole thing unfortunate. Just my two cents.
Gosh, take a few weeks off to be with my flame-boy civic friends (trying to get my car track ready) and you all really get into it.
I've read this thread in the last two days front to back and concluded:
1) I'm impressed with you all as a community. Well thought out.
2) Tank is a good moderator and acted within the limits of his authority/responsibility, considering the best interest of the forum.
3) En_Route got what he asked for, although he definitely was a contributor here.
4) (My opinion) Sometimes giving some one a "third" chance works out.
My two cents.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on July 09, 2012, 07:38:04 PM
To be honest the civility rule confuses me a little. Are we technically allowed to vent frustrations at generalized groups of people every once in a while or is there more of a problem when one poster targets another and personally attacks that person here.
I'd like this clarified as well.
It's my opinion that the civility rule applies to our conduct toward fellow members of this site, and toward the site in general. That is, members should show at least a modicum of maturity and respect for each other. Obviously this has broken down on occasion, and enforcement has been (and will remain) a matter of personal judgment calls on the part of staff, which equally obviously will never be completely impeccable and impartial.
The site ideal of a "happy and productive atmosphere" has not always been achieved, and this thread is a regrettable example of failure in that regard. How we as a community will weather the recent drama remains to be seen, but (aside from a couple of glaring examples of deplorable behavior) I'm proud of the way the people here have tried to keep things from spiraling out of control. I'm optimistic that we'll continue to live up to the name Whitney chose for this place.
In retrospect, I wonder if we have been a little too quick to criticise the 'management' in this case.
The most important thing at stake here is the community which I'd hope most of you will appreciate. I, for one, believe there is something unique here and if we want to keep it special we all must take responsibility for the tone that is set. That means not only holding those who take a forthright approach to expressing views as accountable for their utterances, but also supporting them when we know they have always tried to act in the best interests of the community. To err is to be human. Let's not allow the forum to descend into the well of petty politics like so many others. We're bigger than that, right? Let's also not loose sight of the essence of this place, that Recusant has mentioned, of Whitneys well-named and aspirational vision. I'm proud to be a part of that. I trust we can do it justice. And with the humility and maturity required to realise the vision offer due respect to the moderators who's job is hard (and thankless) enough.
So, thank you Tank, Recusant, Tom, Joe, McQ, Whitney (and any other unsung heroes) for having the guts to do what you do.
Edit: Added McQ (soz)
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 11, 2012, 08:13:37 AM
In retrospect, I wonder if we have been a little too quick to criticise the 'management' in this case.
The most important thing at stake here is the community which I'd hope most of you will appreciate. I, for one, believe there is something unique here and if we want to keep it special we all must take responsibility for the tone that is set. That means not only holding those who take a forthright approach to expressing views as accountable for their utterances, but also supporting them when we know they have always tried to act in the best interests of the community. To err is to be human. Let's not allow the forum to descend into the well of petty politics like so many others. We're bigger than that, right? Let's also not loose sight of the essence of this place, that Recusant has mentioned, of Whitneys well-named and aspirational vision. I'm proud to be a part of that. I trust we can do it justice. And with the humility and maturity required to realise the vision offer due respect to the moderators who's job is hard (and thankless) enough.
So, thank you Tank, Recusant, Tom, Joe, Whitney (and any other unsung heroes) for having the guts to do what you do.
Nah lets "fuck it up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5JkycRops8)"!
Only messing. Serious though it was about a style of moderating that had starting to become more frequent and prevalent and wasn't always part of the forum dynamics that was fueling the "cult like" accusation that certain ex-members applied, which certainly wasn't the case. If that's the way the staff feel is the correct way for the forum to progress then that's fine with me but I will jump ship as that's not the reason I joined this forum.
Quote from: Crow on July 11, 2012, 08:31:23 AM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 11, 2012, 08:13:37 AM
In retrospect, I wonder if we have been a little too quick to criticise the 'management' in this case.
The most important thing at stake here is the community which I'd hope most of you will appreciate. I, for one, believe there is something unique here and if we want to keep it special we all must take responsibility for the tone that is set. That means not only holding those who take a forthright approach to expressing views as accountable for their utterances, but also supporting them when we know they have always tried to act in the best interests of the community. To err is to be human. Let's not allow the forum to descend into the well of petty politics like so many others. We're bigger than that, right? Let's also not loose sight of the essence of this place, that Recusant has mentioned, of Whitneys well-named and aspirational vision. I'm proud to be a part of that. I trust we can do it justice. And with the humility and maturity required to realise the vision offer due respect to the moderators who's job is hard (and thankless) enough.
So, thank you Tank, Recusant, Tom, Joe, Whitney (and any other unsung heroes) for having the guts to do what you do.
Nah lets "fuck it up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5JkycRops8)"!
Only messing. Serious though it was about a style of moderating that had starting to become more frequent and prevalent and wasn't always part of the forum dynamics that was fueling the "cult like" accusation that certain ex-members applied, which certainly wasn't the case. If that's the way the staff feel is the correct way for the forum to progress then that's fine with me but I will jump ship as that's not the reason I joined this forum.
B- for humility, Crow...
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 11, 2012, 08:48:32 AM
B- for humility, Crow...
Aye, humility isn't really one of my strong points.
I suggest that we all stop this. NOW. Things have gone much too far, much too quickly, and it will take a lot longer to heal than it took to hurt. When we're collectively in a hole, we should all stop digging.
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
Quote from: OldGit on July 11, 2012, 10:03:40 AM
I suggest that we all stop this. NOW. Things have gone much too far, much too quickly, and it will take a lot longer to heal than it took to hurt. When we're collectively in a hole, we should all stop digging.
It was never about any individual person and if it's kept within the thread then what's the big deal? Taking the issue across the forum rather than keeping it confined is what has been the problem. We can brush it under the carpet and ignore issues whilst they fester then raise their heads at a later date (which is what this is) or answer and challenge them the move forward.
People say things for a reason and how quickly it moved from a complaint about a mod style (not the mod themselves, or even that E_R got banned) to silly bickering that spread across multiple threads over a nuance for the second time shows that there are problems under the surface. I say lets discuss it and people should have the maturity not to make it an issue and ruin other areas of the forum, after all my complaint comes from an issue that was originally swept under the carpet that was with another mod for the same thing. If you disagree with me I'm not going to be offended or upset, or even let it change the way I interact with you, just as disagreements in any other part of the forum don't change the way I interact. When I said I would leave its not a threat in the slightest as I don't really see my involvement in the forum that significant and members like Tank and yourself are far more integral to the dynamics, if Tank feels like he doesn't feel comfortable on the forum as before due to the complaint I have raised and would like me to leave then I happily will do for the prior reason.
Like Scissorlegs said before thanks to all the mods (including Will and Squid) creating and managing what has come before and how they have interacted with this issue.
Welcome back Tank and I am sorry if any of this has caused you grief in any way.
Quote from: Crow on July 11, 2012, 10:51:24 AM
Quote from: OldGit on July 11, 2012, 10:03:40 AM
I suggest that we all stop this. NOW. Things have gone much too far, much too quickly, and it will take a lot longer to heal than it took to hurt. When we're collectively in a hole, we should all stop digging.
It was never about any individual person and if it's kept within the thread then what's the big deal? Taking the issue across the forum rather than keeping it confined is what has been the problem. We can brush it under the carpet and ignore issues whilst they fester then raise their heads at a later date (which is what this is) or answer and challenge them the move forward.
People say things for a reason and how quickly it moved from a complaint about a mod style (not the mod themselves, or even that E_R got banned) to silly bickering that spread across multiple threads over a nuance for the second time shows that there are problems under the surface. I say lets discuss it and people should have the maturity not to make it an issue and ruin other areas of the forum, after all my complaint comes from an issue that was originally swept under the carpet that was with another mod for the same thing. If you disagree with me I'm not going to be offended or upset, or even let it change the way I interact with you, just as disagreements in any other part of the forum don't change the way I interact. When I said I would leave its not a threat in the slightest as I don't really see my involvement in the forum that significant and members like Tank and yourself are far more integral to the dynamics, if Tank feels like he doesn't feel comfortable on the forum as before due to the complaint I have raised and would like me to leave then I happily will do for the prior reason.
Like Scissorlegs said before thanks to all the mods (including Will and Squid) creating and managing what has come before and how they have interacted with this issue.
Welcome back Tank and I am sorry if any of this has caused you grief in any way.
No, you were just stating your opinion. I usually get there in the end, some times it just takes me a while :)
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
Well done, that did seem an unnecessarily serious business but this seems an excellent recovery.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/Themes/default/images/star.gif)(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fattachments.emergencyoffice.com.au%2Fproducts%2Fimages_small%2F7027.png&hash=dd575f7747b84b7a6097781fc0a6e05658f985b5)(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/Themes/default/images/star.gif)
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on July 11, 2012, 10:59:56 AM
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
Well done, that did seem an unnecessarily serious business but this seems an excellent recovery.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/Themes/default/images/star.gif)(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fattachments.emergencyoffice.com.au%2Fproducts%2Fimages_small%2F7027.png&hash=dd575f7747b84b7a6097781fc0a6e05658f985b5)(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/Themes/default/images/star.gif)
Thanks Dad ;D
Hooray! Yippee! Tank, I don't think you've got anything to apologise for. You work bloody hard for us, and if you show a human side once in a while, so be it.
Just no mankinis, please.
Quote from: oldgitHooray! Yippee! Tank, I don't think you've got anything to apologise for. You work bloody hard for us, and if you show a human side once in a while, so be it.
Just no mankinis, please.
What he said! Although I find the vision of one of Tank's tanks wearing a mankini oddly enticing.
Shhh, let's leave the dogs to their slumber...
Hooray!
QuoteI find the vision of one of Tank's tanks wearing a mankini oddly enticing.
That would be a Tankini. The mind boggles.
Quote from: OldGit on July 11, 2012, 12:21:11 PM
QuoteI find the vision of one of Tank's tanks wearing a mankini oddly enticing.
That would be a Tankini. The mind boggles.
Just don't go there!
Yeah, I shouldn't have started that... :-\
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
We love you anyway. ;) Glad to see you back.
Quote from: Velma on July 11, 2012, 06:21:12 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
We love you anyway. ;) Glad to see you back.
;D
Quote from: Guardian85 on July 11, 2012, 05:55:17 PM
Yeah, I shouldn't have started that... :-\
You didn't know us ladies were going to fall on the mankini in a rush, didn you? ;D
Anyway, I second what Velma said, we love you and we're so glad you're back. Both of you!
(https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/523535_3517605543029_1047253963_n.jpg)
Quote from: Crow on July 09, 2012, 04:58:43 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 09, 2012, 02:29:21 PM
That's a fair point. Mia Culpa.
But having lived through 'The Troubles' I have no sympathy for anybody that supports/supported or attempts to white wash what those murdering bastards did. Intelligent my fucking arse.
I apologise for losing my rag over that.
His opinion is fair, not one that agreed with but it is also the same opinion as my Irish mates, they view them in a similar vein as the George Washington and Napoleon. I wonder how our American friends would feel if we called Mr Washigton a "murdering bastard" and a "fucking idiot". There isn't much different between the two situations either.
But anyway no point in flogging a dead horse.
Just to clarify, because I may have failed to make my position clear. I am and always have been opposed to the IRA and believe they have inflicted appalling and pointless savagery on innocents, including their own people. The point I was making is that in my opinion most of them are intelligent. That is not a compliment. Their intelligence made them more destructive in fact. It is a sobering fact that mental capacity is not necessarily correlated positively with empathy, benevolence and humanity.. This is not a topic I really want to pursue any further,but I did want to place on the record that I have absolutely nil sympathy for the IRA whatsoever , rather the reverse.
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
:o you feel protective of me? AWW~ ;---;
Quote from: Velma on July 11, 2012, 07:39:00 PM
(https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/523535_3517605543029_1047253963_n.jpg)
ohmygosh, want that for my next party.
(and a pin)
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 11, 2012, 11:07:01 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
:o you feel protective of me? AWW~ ;---;
Don't push your luck ;)
Quote from: En_Route on July 11, 2012, 08:39:25 PM
Just to clarify, because I may have failed to make my position clear. I am and always have been opposed to the IRA and believe they have inflicted appalling and pointless savagery on innocents, including their own people. The point I was making is that in my opinion most of them are intelligent. That is not a compliment. Their intelligence made them more destructive in fact. It is a sobering fact that mental capacity is not necessarily correlated positively with empathy, benevolence and humanity.. This is not a topic I really want to pursue any further,but I did want to place on the record that I have absolutely nil sympathy for the IRA whatsoever , rather the reverse.
Nice to know. I was uncertain about that as your views seemed to parallel those of my RoI friends but you said you were NI and you never know so I came up with 3 when it should have been 2.
Nice to see you back.
Quote from: Crow on July 12, 2012, 12:30:18 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 11, 2012, 08:39:25 PM
Just to clarify, because I may have failed to make my position clear. I am and always have been opposed to the IRA and believe they have inflicted appalling and pointless savagery on innocents, including their own people. The point I was making is that in my opinion most of them are intelligent. That is not a compliment. Their intelligence made them more destructive in fact. It is a sobering fact that mental capacity is not necessarily correlated positively with empathy, benevolence and humanity.. This is not a topic I really want to pursue any further,but I did want to place on the record that I have absolutely nil sympathy for the IRA whatsoever , rather the reverse.
Nice to know. I was uncertain about that as your views seemed to parallel those of my RoI friends but you said you were NI and you never know so I came up with 3 when it should have been 2.
Nice to see you back.
Thanks Crow; Hang out the bunting! I'm from ROI but live in NI. Your friends would be in a minority even in ROI.
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 11:09:41 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 11, 2012, 11:07:01 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 11, 2012, 10:48:41 AM
Ok, I've calmed down. I'm back. On reflection I have un-banned ER. At the end of the day he's not responsible for my prejudices, bad temper and the fact that I'm very protective of SD in a 'lost soul' kind of way. We've made our peace via email.
*sorry for being the ultimate drama queen*
:o you feel protective of me? AWW~ ;---;
Don't push your luck ;)
I won't~ ;D
Quote from: En_Route on July 12, 2012, 01:16:23 AM
I'm from ROI but live in NI. Your friends would be in a minority even in ROI.
I had a feeling that was the case, I haven't ever been though I do intend to and my experience with proper Irish people (you know ones that are actually from Ireland and not those that say they are but aren't) is limited to them and their families.