Banned from Instruments forum.

muffler

Rozie wrote:

I was referencing your post. And why the **** would I consider rational arguments spam? It's clear at least that I have some understanding of what logic is by being able to identify fallacious statements. Are you only making such idiotic statements to frustrate me, because you know how much I value logic, and making me look like the one who's against what I stand for? This is trolling, and a tactic very typical of US Neo-Conservatives.

Take 2 panadol, go to bed and get a good nights sleep and things will look much better in the morning.

or maybe you just wanna keep diggin that hole

Rozie

muffler wrote:

Take 2 panadol, go to bed and get a good nights sleep and things will look much better in the morning.

or maybe you just wanna keep diggin that hole

Again, I don't see an argument here. While you might not be trying to make one, this is still what 90% of the "argument" against me consists of.

A very insulting post. I won't feel "Better" until people like you stop making posts like this.

Karl Hungus

Rozie wrote:

Man, I'm still banned from that forum.

Of course you are. That's what a permanent ban is. They don't expire.

You were banned for acting in a certain manner, and the fact is, nobody wants to let you back in untill you assure them that you won't act in that manner again. It's that simple.

Rozie wrote:

Again, I don't see an argument here.

Then why reply to it?

You see, this is part of the problem, you respond to everything, no matter how innane or irrelevant. Someone can say something in passing, you can interpret it however you like, and fly off the handle ranting! This creates headaches for everyone, and that is why you're banned from Instruments.

See, what you're doing now, is demonstrating that you will repeat what got you banned.

Talliesin

Rozie wrote:

Any authority that does not back itsself on logical justification. Authority should NEVER be accepted just because it is authority, yet most people do anyway.

There isn't any authority here. There's ownership and favours. Some people own the site, some people do them a favour in helping them.

Some other people have power issues and see authority in any context where someone can do something that someone else can't, hence we get nonsense comments about democracy, moderators being "power mad", etc. but that doesn't make it true.

Hobart

Talliesin wrote:

There isn't any authority here. .....

Well, that's just plain and simply wrong tbh. Look it up in the dictionary, outside of context etc...

I have no idea why you are still banned rozie. It looks to me that Karl is advising you to contact the mod in question, apologise and make some sort of "promise" that you'll be a good boy/girl/"pre-op transgender person" and that should sort it.

Either way I would stop dragging up old posts here, start a new one elsewhere or just leave it, you're just going to get the usual morons with their boring, unfunny verbal diarrhea.

feylya

As far as I'm concerned, the ban is permanent and giving Rozie's posts elsewhere, the forum isn't loosing out.

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

muffler

Hobart wrote:

make some sort of "promise" that you'll be a good boy/girl/"pre-op transgender person"

Either way I would stop dragging up old posts here, start a new one elsewhere or just leave it, you're just going to get the usual morons with their boring, unfunny verbal diarrhea.

You're right. I didn't find that "pre-op transgender person" quip funny either

Killaqueen!!!

I think the ban was stupid, seeing as it was a 'first offence' (if you can call it an offence) but then again I may be a bit biased because I generally disagree with a LOT of the bans that go on here. Going off topic is a stupid reason for a ban IMO. I don't know this guy but from the thread that was pointed out as to why he was banned...well, he doesn't seem like a very nice guy. He's cocky and he thinks he knows everything about a Fuzz Factory. I don't believe anyone in there was attacking him, but does a personal dislike for someone justify a permanant ban? I don't think so. In the end, it's the mods choice and generally a mods choice is final. (At least I haven't seen any overruling, whether it is due to pride or whether the mod was actually in the right - I don't know). Although I find it hard to believe that one mods choice for banning is final, and that no other mod can do anything about it. That is basically saying that no mod will ever abuse his/her power to ban people because that is not true.

muffler

Killaqueen!!! wrote:

In the end, it's the mods choice and generally a mods choice is final......................Although I find it hard to believe that one mods choice for banning is final, and that no other mod can do anything about it. That is basically saying that no mod will ever abuse his/her power to ban people because that is not true.

If a user considers that he/she have been banned in the wrong and it is brought to the attention of the powers that be then it is looked at again.

And yes, some mod decisions have been reversed. In this case I think the ban was justified but Rozie isn't helping in any way towards a reconciliation by adopting the tone that was blazoned in every post

Gordon

Hobart wrote:

Well, that's just plain and simply wrong tbh. Look it up in the dictionary, outside of context etc...

I have no idea why you are still banned rozie. It looks to me that Karl is advising you to contact the mod in question, apologise and make some sort of "promise" that you'll be a good boy/girl/"pre-op transgender person" and that should sort it.

Either way I would stop dragging up old posts here, start a new one elsewhere or just leave it, you're just going to get the usual morons with their boring, unfunny verbal diarrhea.

I think that if Rozie had done this before posting here the chances of being unbanned would be better. However, judging by feylyas post, 2*0=0.

Rozie wrote:

Everything that you're saying - I GET IT.

Cool, we agree.

But

But..

Karl Hungus

Killaqueen!!! wrote:

Although I find it hard to believe that one mods choice for banning is final, and that no other mod can do anything about it. That is basically saying that no mod will ever abuse his/her power to ban people because that is not true.

I think you need a little more information on the situation.

Rozie's ban was in place for well over a year before I became mod of Instruments. I was only just made mod of Instruments a couple of months ago, and very soon after that, Rozie made demands off me to be unbanned.

It's a little odd, don't you think, that all this stuff about how "One mod's decision is final" only came into play after I was made mod? A suspiscious person might think that a certain someone was looking for a loophole in asking a newly appointed mod to overturn their ban?

the_syco

Rozie wrote:

Authority should NEVER be accepted just because it is authority, yet most people do anyway.

Except when its by a mod on a privately owned forum.

Rozie wrote:

Why is it that you never seem to consider that you or the practices of people here are wrong?

They're the mods. If they're ever wrong, they apologize, but thats rare.

Rozie wrote:

So why is it all asking me to question if I'm wrong, but not you? Is it possible that I am right after all, and your way of thinking is flawed and heavily biased?

You question if you are wrong, as deep down, you know you are wrong. The mods are not flawed.

Rozie wrote:

You have never even considered that I might be right, because you're in a position where you can do that and get away with it as the vast majority of people will just suck you with whatever you do anyway.

We have, momentarily, considered it, then laughed, drank more beer, and said no.

Rozie wrote:

It doesn't matter if nobody else ever supports me, ever.

Then why do you still come back, time and time again, to moan?

Rozie wrote:

Yes, it may make it less likely that I'm right/quote]
"Less likely"? How about totally wrong.

Rozie wrote:

but it ultimately does nothing to alter the truth value of my argument.

What truth? You spiel hyperbole, not truth.

Rozie wrote:

It is nothing but a bunch of accusations, illogical statements and personal attacks.

All made by you.

Rozie wrote:

People shouldn't be able to act like strict muppets purely because they CAN. Why are members flung off subforums left and right for minor offenses yet moderators themselves seem to be able to do as they please?

"Seem to". Many mods have been banned from PI, among other forums, by their repective forums, for acting twats.

Rozie wrote:

Boards.ie is the largest Irish forum and the only one that contains many subforums. It is very difficult to find other Irish forums because people come here instead. Saying "just find another place, management's word is final" is looking at a version of the situation so simplified it's completely useless to even consider.

So you have read the T&C? And yet you still come back to try and defy it, only to get banned?

Rozie wrote:

I would like, some day, if someone could actually engage me in a logical argument on this, but I doubt they ever will.

Any time a logical argument appears, and you start to loose, you play the gender/race/transformer/fight-the-poweh card, so stfu.

Rozie wrote:

I've been "calming down" elsewhere but when I realised I was still banned from a forum over very little it just pissed me the hell off.

Calming down ain't good enough. You need to be totally calm. Then you must do the amp test, and after that you get unbanned.

Rozie wrote:

When a bunch of people can shout very loudly telling you how crazy they are, they don't "Need" to present a logical argument. There is nothing I or anyone can do to change this as they'd just be branded as "crazy" too.

Once you ignore the voice's telling you to bomb London, its all good.

Rozie wrote:

It is ridiculous. Banning people permanently for relatively minor offenses is ridiculous. YES YOU CAN DO IT BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE YOU RIGHT.

Actually, it does.

Rozie wrote:

Not only are moderators ABLE to do it, and are given to "right" to be able to, they are not allowed to be criticised for the decisions they make in anything but the tamest of manners. You can do all sorts of things - it doesn't them from making the person doing them a complete asshole. Me rallying against something I can see as incompetent and corrupt doesn't really impact on me much as a person. I'm not really hurting anyone - I can't, in the vast minority. Barring someone from a forum permanently DOES impact someone negatively. Flame-ish threads can be locked or ignored. Bans cannot.Nobody seems to care about that - they just see an opportunity to jump on top of someone with a strongly opposing viewpoint.

If I started a strongly opposing viewpoint, such as Hitler may have been right, and we should kill all the joo's and those confused with what gender they are, you'd proberly jump down my throat, yet if you post a strongly opposing viewpoint, you expect everyone to like it? One mans treasure, is another mans trash.

Rozie wrote:

There are not always alternatives, and it is rarely convenient or potentially successful to "create your own". It is simply much better if the moderators in question don't act like *****.

So... cos its too difficult to keep the nuts out of a forum that you create, you think we should let everyone come in and destroy this one?

Rozie wrote:

"Rules is Rules", unless applying to objective constants, is THE most illogical statement you can give, as it DIRECTLY contradicts critical thinking, which is the foundation of Logic. No matter what you can do to me as a moderator, you are wrong on this, absolutely. By definition. And it would quieten me down a whole lot if you'd at least admit that.

I don't think you know the meaning of "quieten down", tbh.

Rozie wrote:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with bitching, moaning, and questioning just about every little thing whoever is in charge of what is doing. It's the only way to make things improve. How else would they? Most people like to screw other people over, even if they claim they're donating their "free time" for an "invaluable service"(i.e. longer e-penis from being a moderator). That's why they make complaining out to be "immature".

I'm intigued. How does B modding PI give her a bigger e-penis? Thats a tad bit sexist. Bigger e-titties, maybe, but you really got to get with the times, tbh.

Killaqueen!!!

Karl Hungus wrote:

I think you need a little more information on the situation.

Rozie's ban was in place for well over a year before I became mod of Instruments. I was only just made mod of Instruments a couple of months ago, and very soon after that, Rozie made demands off me to be unbanned.

It's a little odd, don't you think, that all this stuff about how "One mod's decision is final" only came into play after I was made mod? A suspiscious person might think that a certain someone was looking for a loophole in asking a newly appointed mod to overturn their ban?

I wasn't exactly saying anything against you - I didn't even know until now that you are mod of the Instruments forum. In that case (and every other), it is a little cheeky to go behind the origional mod's back (who banned him) and ask a newly appointed one such as yourself.

I haven't been on boards that long, and I don't generally go into cases in such detail because frankly I don't care, but from what I've seen (and I could be totally off here) most of the time, a mod is never in the wrong. How many times in the feedback, does someone question their banning? No matter the arguement it always turns up the same. Now I know you're going to ask me for links here but this is my final say in it. It's just from what I've seen.

In saying that, the mods are usually right, and that the banning WAS justified (including this one) but still, IMO, harsh. (i.e it is a rule not to go off topic, but IMO that doesn't justify a permanant ban. but rules are rules, I suppose - no matter what I think of them!)

LundiMardi

Ouch, i just read some of my posts on the thread KarlHungus linked to, i was waaayyy outta line:) Although I stand by my opinion i should and could have been a little more diplomatic.

Rozie, do yourself a favour and read over this thread, and even the thread karl linked to(you can still read when logged out).. You don't come across as a very nice person(i mean that in the nicest possible way of course), but you seem to have a major chip on your shoulder about something, i don't know what and i don't particularly give a ****, but you need to address it and then maybe people would be more willing to give second chances.

Hobart

muffler wrote:

You're right. I didn't find that "pre-op transgender person" quip funny either

Keep on missing the point, why don't you.

GuanYin

Meh - no warning - staight out perm ban..... seems a tad over kill for me.

Unless you're banning someone on the strength of dislike of their behaviour in another forum - which is effectively giving someone an over the top ban for not liking their posting style.

I think the question I'd ask (and noone else seems to be asking) is how many other people did feyla perm ban straight out for going off topic (or whatever the orginal transgression was - OT seems to be the accusation I found). If rozie is getting harsher treatment than others and feyla has as much as said he doesn't like her posting style - then I think that there is something amiss is the moderation of this situation.

Not that my opinion counts for much.

Paligulus

psi wrote:

Meh - no warning - staight out perm ban..... seems a tad over kill for me.

Unless you're banning someone on the strength of dislike of their behaviour in another forum - which is effectively giving someone an over the top ban for not liking their posting style.

I think the question I'd ask (and noone else seems to be asking) is how many other people did feyla perm ban straight out for going off topic (or whatever the orginal transgression was - OT seems to be the accusation I found). If rozie is getting harsher treatment than others and feyla has as much as said he doesn't like her posting style - then I think that there is something amiss is the moderation of this situation.

Not that my opinion counts for much.

Just going by the post that was linked (The epic fuzz factory debate) I think the tangent was more silly than out an out offensive to anybody. Although, it took up a lot of thread space, I presumed everybody either skipped over or laughed at the whole insanity of it!!!

Is it just me or would a ban lift not be the easist for everybody, on the grounds that if Rozie acts the blaggard she gets banned straight away?

Nevyn

Is it just me or would a ban lift not be the easist for everybody, on the grounds that if Rozie acts the blaggard she gets banned straight away?

Why take that risk and waste posters and mods time when she still keeps up the same type of confrontational and agressive ranting ?

GuanYin

Thaedydal wrote:

Why take that risk and waste posters and mods time when she still keeps up the same type of confrontational and agressive ranting ?

Because on that logic you just go and ban anyone who you find disagreeable.

Time Magazine

Much like the disputed 'If you are considered a disruptive influence by the moderators or the admins your access to this board will be removed and your readmittance will be at the discretion of the mods of the forum' rule in the Soccer forum?

kaimera

Ibid wrote:

Much like the disputed 'If you are considered a disruptive influence by the moderators or the admins your access to this board will be removed and your readmittance will be at the discretion of the mods of the forum' rule in the Soccer forum?

*zing*

GuanYin

Ibid wrote:

Much like the disputed 'If you are considered a disruptive influence by the moderators or the admins your access to this board will be removed and your readmittance will be at the discretion of the mods of the forum' rule in the Soccer forum?

Apart from the fact that the rule you quoted relates directly and soley to behaviour and disruption in the soccer forum and the soccer forum alone, yes, exactly like that :rolleyes:

secret_squirrel

psi wrote:

Because on that logic you just go and ban anyone who you find disagreeable.

Have you even read Rozie's post history? Half of the thread she is involved in go into a spiral of insults and flaming from which they dont recover.

Including I might add this one, which she has resurected from the past it should have stayed in.

The fact is Rozie is a massively disruptive poster, who is completely incapable of realising when she is in the wrong, or even admitting she is wrong.

In addition to causing many a thread to deteriorate into flames, she has posted gay porn links and browser window generators.

She has also re-registered several times to get around a ban.

Imo she deserves NO benefit of the doubt whatsoever, in fact the Admins seem to have gone out of their way to avoid giving her a site ban, for reasons best known only to themselves and for little thanks on her part.

She deserves absolutely zero tolerant imo. Check her post history and judge for yourself.

GuanYin

secret_squirrel wrote:

Have you even read Rozie's post history? Half of the thread she is involved in go into a spiral of insults and flaming from which they dont recover.

Including I might add this one, which she has resurected from the past it should have stayed in.

The fact is Rozie is a massively disruptive poster, who is completely incapable of realising when she is in the wrong, or even admitting she is wrong.

I could say the same about many boards users and some mods - shall we purge them too?

When you start pre-empting bans or "looking for any excuse" to ban someone based on their behavior elsewhere (which is, face it, what you are championing here) you run into trouble, because precidents get set.

In addition to causing many a thread to deteriorate into flames, she has posted gay porn links and browser window generators.

She has also re-registered several times to get around a ban.

I'm not sure how the moderation of the instruments forum governs these areas. If the user is not-site banned, then the user should get equal treatment.

Imo she deserves NO benefit of the doubt whatsoever, in fact the Admins seem to have gone out of their way to avoid giving her a site ban, for reasons best known only to themselves and for little thanks on her part.

Well their opinion is actually worth something, so who are you to second guess them?

She deserves absolutely zero tolerant imo. Check her post history and judge for yourself.

Why should I judge her? Why do I have that right? Why do you for that matter?

It isn't my job, it isn't yours.

My sole responsibility regarding the user is in relation to the posts in soccer or paranormal. My "job" is to make sure she makes no disruption in those forums. She doesn't, so my role ends. If the user annoys me elsewhere, thats between me and them and nothing to do with my moderating duties.

Your sole responsibility here (so far as I can make out) is to watch your own posts and make sure that YOU don''t break rules. You may report posts at your leisure as you see them offending, but calling shots on who gets to use boards is a tad above your station and mine.

secret_squirrel

psi wrote:

When you start pre-empting bans or "looking for any excuse" to ban someone based on their behavior elsewhere (which is, face it, what you are championing here) you run into trouble, because precidents get set.

And precedents are bad why exactly? Most of real life works on them, and most of boards too.

I'm not sure how the moderation of the instruments forum governs these areas. If the user is not-site banned, then the user should get equal treatment.

Thats rubbish and you know it. Both moderators and ordinary posters treat their fellow posters differently depending on their interactions in the past. Thats just human nature.

Well their opinion is actually worth something, so who are you to second guess them?

Who am I not to? Im free to express an opinion different to that of the Admins until such time as they decide to not allow me to.

Why should I judge her? Why do I have that right? Why do you for that matter?

Why dont I have the right to judge her? - I have through her posts. You seem to be confusing my right to judge her, with my ability to do anything about it.

I have as much right to form an opinion on (or 'judge') another poster on boards as anyone else. The fact that I am (fortunately) powerless to act on that judgement, doesnt stop me posting it when I deem it relevant, unless a Mod or Admin chooses not to allow me to do that.

Your sole responsibility here (so far as I can make out) is to watch your own posts and make sure that YOU don''t break rules.

As is yours - lecturing other posters isnt.

psi wrote:

but calling shots on who gets to use boards is a tad above your station and mine.

I wouldnt dream of attempting to call the shots on boards - even supposing I had the power to do so.

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how expressing an opinion about a poster equates to 'calling the shots'. It certainly doesnt in my book.

The fact is that Rozie has been at times quite possibly the most disruptive poster active on boards, in my opinion, for which she has been banned before.

Its something she has proved completely unable to learn from.

Given that why should she be unbanned?

Terry

see, this is why i stay away from music forums. not just the ones here, but all over the internet. i like music. i know what type of msic i like and i won't have my listening habits ridiculed by some 17 year old who thinks they know it all because they once saw a steve vai video and like a really obscure band that nobody else has heard of and, as soon as someone else does hear of them, they only like the old stuff and go to every length to point out that they were a fan before said band sold out.
i likes what i likes. music snobs can kiss my big fat white ass.

Talliesin

Hobart wrote:

Well, that's just plain and simply wrong tbh. Look it up in the dictionary, outside of context etc...

There are several definitions.

Either there is no authority here, or they should be accepted just because it is authority, depending on which definition you plump for.

I was going for the sort that should be questioned, nay, given the third degree.

GuanYin

secret_squirrel wrote:

And precedents are bad why exactly? Most of real life works on them, and most of boards too.

Depends on what it is. A precedent where amod was slapped for refusing to back down from an obviously silly move would be good imo. While a precedent where a mod can ban someone for actions outside the forum they mod is very very bad.

Thats rubbish and you know it. Both moderators and ordinary posters treat their fellow posters differently depending on their interactions in the past. Thats just human nature.

Perhap some moderators do but they shouldn't. I for one, don't.

Who am I not to? Im free to express an opinion different to that of the Admins until such time as they decide to not allow me to.

Indeed, if they are merely your opinions and not an actual call to action, then I do apologise.

Why dont I have the right to judge her? - I have through her posts. You seem to be confusing my right to judge her, with my ability to do anything about it.

Perhaps, may I ask if you report posts by her that you deem troublesome?
You see, coming her and judging her when you have not acted on those judgements would be where I'd see your "right" to be dubious. Thats not to say you can't - just that you aren't right to do so.

I have as much right to form an opinion on (or 'judge') another poster on boards as anyone else. The fact that I am (fortunately) powerless to act on that judgement, doesnt stop me posting it when I deem it relevant, unless a Mod or Admin chooses not to allow me to do that.

Fortunate indeed.

As is yours - lecturing other posters isnt.

Oh, rights to opinions don't extend to me then?

The fact is that Rozie has been at times quite possibly the most disruptive poster active on boards, in my opinion, for which she has been banned before.

And unbanned. so clean slate and all that.

Given that why should she be unbanned?

Because what she was banned for was a mild transgression that has probably been served with credit by her ban time. Everything else she has done, has no bearing on the moderation of the instruments forum.

~Rebel~

Have read through this whole thread (and the adjoining links) so figure i may as well through in my own 2 cents.

Psi makes a very good point in that the decision of the Instruments Mod to ban or unban should be based solely on what happens within the Instruments sub-forum. IMO, the OP came across quite badly in that (and at times, this) sub-forum, but there were no warnings on thread to stop within the instruments thread in question, and i assume no PM warnings as these would have been mentioned by now if they had, so based entirely on goings on within the Instruments sub-forum, a perm-ban for going off topic in a pretty long winded, kinda funny way is pretty severe, it being a first offense for that section.

I would imagine a posters behavior throughout all the forums should only come into play and be relevant if its a site-wide ban thats in question.

If the OP has their chance to return and does something on that sub-forum to deserve a ban, then fair enough.

Question: If a mod finds out that someone has been acting the maggot in another forum altogether, say, forum.notebookreview.com, and was also a member here, would they then give a perm ban here for a minor first offence?