Unfair banning etc etc

GuanYin

Ok, now I'll see if feedback works.

A couple of years ago I was banned from christianity due to a long running saga that ended nastily.

After PM consultation with DeVore, who had put the ban in place, I was unbanned by him this year.

I've posted 4-5 times in Christianity, didn't post anything offensive and at one stage have suggested the naysayers make things more theological and less sciencey. To the best of my knowledge I've broken no rules.

However, due to a reported post by a user who said in her reported post that there was nothing wrong with mypost but I was banned for life (which wasn't the case at all), I've been banned.

Now, the person who banned me unbanned me and I haven't done anything else wrong, I'm hoping this is a big misunderstanding and I can be unbanned?

Thanks

Karoma

PM the mod and explain?

GuanYin

yeah that would have been cleverer.

Ya know I didn't know how to find out who the mods were until after you posted.

Never been banned from a forum unbeknowst before, so never realised that sometimes users can't figure out who mods.

Anyways, apologies, I've PM'd and hopefully I can resolve this.

sceptre

For me the logic is perfectly simple.

If a lifetime ban currently exists, no action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate the ban.

If a lifetime ban does not currently exist, particular action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate any previous ban. In the absence of that particular action, the mere existence of a particular previous lifetime ban is not in itself enough to damn the banned. Where that particular action is taken by the banned the previous existence of a ban may not be relevant given that the action taken is in itself enough for a ban to be instated.

I've seen the reported post and in the absence of a current lifetime ban, assuming that's so, justifying a new ban may break logic. Either way, if there isn't a lifetime ban currently in place, using a lifetime ban as a reason for banning isn't justified. If there is, see statement above.

Karoma

*cranial explosion*


Anyways: psi, you may want to also PM DeV and ask that he informs the mods of the ban removal when he gets a chance, to clear things up.

Villain

sceptre wrote:

For me the logic is perfectly simple.

If a lifetime ban currently exists, no action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate the ban.

If a lifetime ban does not currently exist, particular action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate any previous ban. In the absence of that particular action, the mere existence of a particular previous lifetime ban is not in itself enough to damn the banned. Where that particular action is taken by the banned the previous existence of a ban may not be relevant given that the action taken is in itself enough for a ban to be instated.

I've seen the reported post and in the absence of a current lifetime ban, assuming that's so, justifying a new ban may break logic. Either way, if there isn't a lifetime ban currently in place, using a lifetime ban as a reason for banning isn't justified. If there is, see statement above.

Poetry!

GuanYin

sceptre wrote:

For me the logic is perfectly simple.

If a lifetime ban currently exists, no action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate the ban.

Well seeing as DeVore was the person who banned me originally and I am now (or was until about 30 mins ago) unbanned, I guess it is safe to say I'm not meant to be banned.

Do you think ANYONE here would dare overturn DeVore's ban?

If a lifetime ban does not currently exist, particular action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate any previous ban. In the absence of that particular action, the mere existence of a particular previous lifetime ban is not in itself enough to damn the banned. Where that particular action is taken by the banned the previous existence of a ban may not be relevant given that the action taken is in itself enough for a ban to be instated.

I've seen the reported post and in the absence of a current lifetime ban, assuming that's so, justifying a new ban may break logic. Either way, if there isn't a lifetime ban currently in place, using a lifetime ban as a reason for banning isn't justified. If there is, see statement above.

Errmmm I just about followed that

GuanYin

Karoma wrote:

*cranial explosion*


Anyways: psi, you may want to also PM DeV and ask that he informs the mods of the ban removal when he gets a chance, to clear things up.

Sure see what the mods say, hopefully it will be cleared up reasonably.

Asiaprod

psi wrote:

Do you think ANYONE here would dare overturn DeVore's ban?

not if they have any sense. Let me know what happens.

GuanYin

Asiaprod wrote:

not if they have any sense. Let me know what happens.

Thanks. Will do.

Sceptre just made me very confused. I actually sober too.

Sparky

I think sceptre is the brains behind those insurance letters and clauses.

Karoma

Deleted User wrote:

Sceptre just made me very confused. I actually sober too.

Oh dear. Lesbian/Gay/Misc can be found under Soc...

I always knew Sceptre was fine but intelligent too.What a catch?:D

cast_iron

Asiaprod wrote:

not if they have any sense. Let me know what happens.

I'm assuming he is human, so....licking his *** may actually work!

kaimera

GuanYin

Just to update, I have been unbanned by the mod in question, who basically acted on heresay of another user.

Appreciate him rectifying his mistake, no hard feelings.

I also want Neuropraxis to know that I forgive her and hold know resentment against her for her malicious intentions and actions towards me.

The system works?

BlitzKrieg

its just a coincidence...

Karoma

This may set a bad precedent.


... No. Like all systems: It works for only a small minority.


Use the Help Desk. ¬_¬

Amz

psi wrote:

I also want Neuropraxis to know that I forgive her and hold know resentment against her for her malicious intentions and actions towards me.

That's very Christian of you.

Rabies

Karoma wrote:

Use the Help Desk. ¬_¬

But then we don't get to add a pointless comment to the thread

sceptre, my head hurts.

GuanYin

Amz wrote:

That's very Christian of you.

Hopefully it will spread...

The_Minister

sceptre wrote:

For me the logic is perfectly simple.

If a lifetime ban currently exists, no action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate the ban.

If a lifetime ban does not currently exist, particular action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate any previous ban. In the absence of that particular action, the mere existence of a particular previous lifetime ban is not in itself enough to damn the banned. Where that particular action is taken by the banned the previous existence of a ban may not be relevant given that the action taken is in itself enough for a ban to be instated.

I've seen the reported post and in the absence of a current lifetime ban, assuming that's so, justifying a new ban may break logic. Either way, if there isn't a lifetime ban currently in place, using a lifetime ban as a reason for banning isn't justified. If there is, see statement above.

Boards.ie's answer to the Chewbacca defence.

Beruthiel

psi wrote:

Hopefully it will spread...

Well, I for one have been inspired...

Diogenes

sceptre wrote:

For me the logic is perfectly simple.

If a lifetime ban currently exists, no action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate the ban.

If a lifetime ban does not currently exist, particular action is required on the part of the banned for a mod to reinstate any previous ban. In the absence of that particular action, the mere existence of a particular previous lifetime ban is not in itself enough to damn the banned. Where that particular action is taken by the banned the previous existence of a ban may not be relevant given that the action taken is in itself enough for a ban to be instated.

I've seen the reported post and in the absence of a current lifetime ban, assuming that's so, justifying a new ban may break logic. Either way, if there isn't a lifetime ban currently in place, using a lifetime ban as a reason for banning isn't justified. If there is, see statement above.

PS, you may make kitty scared, but I for one, after reading that believe love is hate, truth is lies, and we've always been at war with eurasia.

GuanYin

Beruthiel wrote:

Well, I for one have been inspired...

Well it is good that love and good came from some hateful actions.


I too have been inspired - to spell check my posts so I don't confuse Know and no again.

Talliesin

Reporting a post, rightly or wrongly, is not a hateful action. Quit while you're ahead.

GuanYin

Talliesin wrote:

Reporting a post, rightly or wrongly, is not a hateful action. Quit while you're ahead.

The post wasn't reported actually, if you read it, it quite clearly states in perfectly plain english that there is nothing offensive or wrong about the post and the poster not the post is being reported
.
In fact, given the guidelines for using reported posts, the action of using the report post was an abuse of the report post system (as clearly stated).

So ermm, yeah, quit etc etc right back at ya

Talliesin

psi wrote:

it quite clearly states in perfectly plain english that there is nothing offensive or wrong about the post

How hateful!

sceptre

I still reckon my post is a perfectly plain and simplistic abstract examination of a particular case. Conclusion follows logically from the initial possible premises. I speakah the english vairy good, I learn it from a book.