mustard madness

cardshark202

Seems like colonel mustard is going a bit power mad with his bannings. If I started a mustard-related thread in the mustard forum would I get banned? I recently had some disgusting cheapo English mustard in Australia and I would like to post about it and warn others of the brand. Didn't know where else it would be safe to post this.

ecksor

Yes, yes you would. Keep away.

oleras

cardshark202 wrote:

Seems like colonel mustard is going a bit power mad with his bannings. If I started a mustard-related thread in the mustard forum would I get banned? I recently had some disgusting cheapo English mustard in Australia and I would like to post about it and warn others of the brand. Didn't know where else it would be safe to post this.

banned from the mustard forum is like getting barred from a pub up the country you will never visit again, does it really matter ?

ecksor

I've been site banning them.

Rb

I found it amusing anyway, well done Ecksor.

Time Magazine

What do people think of potatoes with mustard seeds in them?

Rb

Ibid wrote:

What do people think of potatoes with mustard seeds in them?

Not mad about them tbh.

oleras

ecksor wrote:

I've been site banning them.

Ditches the idea fast of getting banned from the mustard forum....lol...although i did stumple in there looking for motors once....scary place*shudders* :eek:

cardshark202

On a serious note, if HJ for example was not a poker forum regular, or rounders wasn't I'm pretty sure neither would be banned. But anyway, the mustard forum must only be for people with a mustard fetish. One of my friends is a mustard smuggler who has a fetish for english mustard. That last sentence is completely true, his boards name is kinaldo and he will not deny his illness. I think its called a 'lust for mustard'.

nesf

Ibid wrote:

What do people think of potatoes with mustard seeds in them?

Why waste mustard on a potato?

sikes

i xpost this.

IMO, i think the poker forum posters should be allowed a bit of slack, especially the ones with a high post count and contribute a lot to the forum, after all it was a bit of fun and they posted in a forum with little or no traffic.

I'm sure the traffic to the poker forum is one of the highest revenue generators for boards, if not the highest, and by banning some of the highest posters and best contributors you are shooting yourselves in the foot.

Rb

rb_ie wrote:

I found it amusing anyway, well done Ecksor.

I was referring to the small bans here, not Reggies 3 month ban.

nesf

sikes wrote:

I'm sure the traffic to the poker forum is one of the highest revenue generators for boards, if not the highest, and by banning some of the highest posters and best contributors you are shooting yourselves in the foot.

Looking at forums and users in that way is kind of against the community spirit of this site (at least in my opinion). Users shouldn't be given lee-way just because they happen to post in a popular and busy forum. From an economic point of view, you do have an argument, but I'm not sure if giving preference to such people would not just create even more trouble across the majority of the site (seeing that poker forum users wouldn't make up a majority of the posters or anything).

sikes

nesf wrote:

Looking at forums and users in that way is kind of against the community spirit of this site (at least in my opinion). Users shouldn't be given lee-way just because they happen to post in a popular and busy forum.

Is this not already happening? Someone with a low post count will get a life ban for trolling while one with a very high post count might get a week.

Boston

So the poker forum regulars own boards now and can do what they want?

nesf

sikes wrote:

Is this not already happening? Someone with a low post count will get a life ban for trolling while one with a very high post count might get a week.

That's not discrimination based on which forum they post in though. What exactly do you mean by trolling anyway? Trolling rarely ends up the user site banned, or at least that's from what I've seen. Just a forum ban usually.

sikes

Boston wrote:

So the poker forum regulars own boards now and can do what they want?

Who said that?

Boston

You implied it.

sikes

nesf wrote:

That's not discrimination based on which forum they post in though.

I think that any high volume contributor to any forum should not be looked upon in the same fashion as someone with a low post count and doesn't offer anything to the community.

nesf wrote:

What exactly do you mean by trolling anyway?

I don't really know the definition. Its just something I have seen in the ban list a few times.

Though I would classify this as trolling:

BOSTON wrote:

So the poker forum regulars own boards now and can do what they want?

ShoveAllIn

ecksor wrote:

I've been site banning them.

pld.

on all the levels.

sikes

Boston wrote:

You implied it.

Where?

Boston

They don't own the site, Ecksor is one of the owners, they feiced about on his forum, they got banned. Those are the facts, end of story, carriage return.

Time Magazine

nesf wrote:

Why waste mustard on a potato?

I was served it in the canteen recently. I wasn't aware the little brown bits were mustard seeds at the time, I thought they were just some little herb or something.

I must say, it was vomit-inducing. Not that I've anything against mustard in small doses, but would you have it with ice-cream? Or more accurately in this case, with chicken stir-fry? Chicken stir-fry and mustard potatoes do not go well.

Faith

I just visited the Poker forum for the first time, seeing as it's been in Feedback so much recently. It's like a different world! Full of numbers and words that make no sense!

There goes my belief that I vaguely understood the game .

sikes

Boston wrote:

They don't own the site,

No one said they did. This is getting tiresome. You cant put words in someones mouth then use it in your argument when you are getting the worst of a discussion. All you did in this thread is jump in with two feet, making a wild assumption without clearly understanding what had been written.

Boston wrote:

Ecksor is one of the owners, they feiced about on his forum, they got banned. Those are the facts, end of story, carriage return.

I appreciate all the work both the owners and the mods do to keep boards running. However, i think he has made a bad judgment call on this one, for the reasons I have already outlined before. But yes, this is his forum and he and the owners can do as they please.

shoutman

sikes wrote:

I appreciate all the work both the owners and the mods do to keep boards running. However, i think he has made a bad judgment call on this one.

I absolutely agree. I mean it was all a bit of harmless fun, the first set of bannings were for a day and I'm sure everyone took it all in good humour and jest. But to ban someone for three months for posting about mustard in a mustard forum is just madness.

I mean if I didnt know Solskjer and read his post for all I know it could of been absolutely true and it could of been a very sincere (albeit rather strange) post.

Boston

It's pretty clear whats going on here. You think you and the banned users are big shots because your tiny part of boards.ie is a) popular with some admins and b) relates to something that potentially generates money. As such you should be allowed special treatment and free rein. Is that pretty much it?

RasTa

Jesus chirst just ban them from the mustard form, ffs.

shoutman

Boston wrote:

It's pretty clear whats going on here. You think you and the banned users are big shots because your tiny part of boards.ie is a) popular with some admins and b) relates to something that potentially generates money. As such you should be allowed special treatment and free rein. Is that pretty much it?

Are you being serious here?

Since when has trolling in one forum required a site wide ban?

Its absolutely ridiculous in my opinion. I mean it was a bit of harmless banter at the expense of no one. It was not offensive to anyone and in no way would it effect other users of the site. No one objected and (regardless of whether ecksor took quick and decisive action) I dont think anyone would of objected if the threads remained open.

Can you people honestly tell me that the Mustard forum is not in someway a joke? Thats like having a salt forum of a tabasco sauce forum, it makes no sense and the vast majority of people (I would assume) who post in said forums must be taking the piss.

Boston

Mustard forum is ecksor's baby. If you mess with it you'll get what coming to you.

Time Magazine

Boston wrote:

It's pretty clear whats going on here. You think you and the banned users are big shots because your tiny part of boards.ie is a) popular with some admins and b) relates to something that potentially generates money. As such you should be allowed special treatment and free rein. Is that pretty much it?

FFS stop for once.

He/she/it thinks it's unfair that people/tribes/nations get sitebanned for three months for trolling on a single forum. I imagine ecksor is having a bit of laugh and knows that's unfair too. Whether he's going to cut the ban short or continue the joke by creating his pet forum a Defended Zone of Zero Penetration, who's to know.