Why am I still banned

keynesian

So, yea, like, why am I still banned from from the "Lesbain & Gay & Bisexual" forum?

In fact why was I banned in the first place, is it caz I'm Gay?

aidan_walsh

Have you PM'd swiss, ixoy or Stark to find out?

keynesian

oh, yea, thats a good Idea.

But why should I have to, I shouldn't have been banned, it's totally unfair.

I feel wronged, marginalized, and ostracisted.

BuffyBot

Somehow, I doubt it was without reason...

keynesian

Just because you have a reason don't mean your justified or right.

_blank_

So, when you were banned did the mod who banned give you a reason, or did you just discover, out of the blue one day, that you were banned?

What did you do?

Or did you do anything, that you can possiby think of, that might have maybe warranted a ban?

Boston

I think you where given a temp ban for some minor reason and then a perm ban for posting under your other user name (TrawlingTroll). Thats how I remember it, but I'm not 100% sure.

keynesian

Yes but that's not a reason and that's not what I was told.

Is there a rule againts having two user names? where is it?

LuckyLloyd

keynesian wrote:

Yes but that's not a reason and that's not what I was told.

Is there a rule againts having two user names? where is it?

You are 'cruising for a bruising' methinks.

aidan_walsh

keynesian wrote:

Yes but that's not a reason and that's not what I was told.

I thought you didn't know why you were banned. What were you told?

keynesian wrote:

Is there a rule agents having two user names?

There is if the second user name is used to circumvent a ban, or for general "anon" muppetry. Its a common sense rule that really shouldn't need to be written down anywhere.

Karl Hungus

keynesian wrote:

Is there a rule againts having two user names? where is it?

Yes, and generally both usernames are site-banned. It's a total and complete no-no.

keynesian

Plus you could have just said, like.

found the reason

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixoy
Temporary ban for crappy post!


That's personal, not objective.

Boston

General boards rule that you're no allow to use a new account to get around a ban. Normally results in a siteban. It's a perfectly good reason to ban someone permanently from a forum. Also I didn't think you where told anything? I'm not saying it is the reason, just that when you where perm banned I took that as being one of the main reasons, no one told me.

Edit: As I said, some minor offence initially. Also the mods don't have to be objective.

keynesian

UnLuckyLloyd wrote:

You are 'cruising for a bruising' methinks.

Is that caz your words are so sharp?????

_blank_

Well show us said 'crappy post' then.

keynesian

seansouth wrote:

Well show us said 'crappy post' then.

That's illogical, if I'm banned from the forum, how can I find it; Or even know what it was, "crappy post" is subjective.

Hagar

keynesian wrote:

I feel wronged, marginalized, and ostracisted.

I demand to know, who ostracisted this man? Unfeeling baxtards....

_blank_

You can still read the forum if you log out.

So, it could be any one of your hundred and sixty-odd posts that you were banned for.

Do you not reckon it would be one of the ones from around the same timeframe as you got your ban?

Your PM that you got will be dated, look for some posts you made on the LGBT forum around then.

It's bound to be one of them.

aidan_walsh

That's illogical, if I'm banned from the forum, how can I find it

Magic!

http://magicaltrevor.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=255 for all your banned viewings.

keynesian

Boston wrote:

the mods don't have to be objective.

Sure that should be a general rule. Why aren't they objective.

Sorry if I believe in free speech, and the ability to speck my mind without censorship or reprisal.

Boston

keynesian wrote:

Sure that should be a general rule. Why aren't they objective.

Sorry if I believe in free speech, and the ability to speck my mind without censorship or reprisal.

You don't have free speech here, or in Ireland for that matter. Moderators usually are objective, they just don't have to be. Somewhere along the line someone concluded you needed a break from the forum, most likely for the gems in this thread. After that you used a new account to get around the ban, and the ban was never lifted. I don't know if your new account is also banned.

trawingtroll

aidan_walsh wrote:

There is if the second user name is used to circumvent a ban, or for general "anon" muppetry. Its a common sense rule that really shouldn't need to be written down anywhere.

So is this general "anon" muppetry, you fag?

LuckyLloyd

keynesian wrote:

Is that caz your words are so sharp?????

No. It is because holding two accounts - particularly if you activated the second one to get around complications experienced on your intitial account related to bans or other such punishments - is the Board's equivalent of breaking the first commandment. It will probably have consequences.

The concept of "free speech" does not exist on this site. Boards is not a democracy.

_blank_

Jesus Christ.

Are you serious in doing that?

You must want a permaban.

copacetic

Karl Hungus wrote:

Yes, and generally both usernames are site-banned. It's a total and complete no-no.

I had this conversation before, it seems that mods know it is a complete and utter no-no, but that the rule isn't actually anywhere to be found..

Terry

trawingtroll wrote:

So is this general "anon" muppetry, you fag?

So, when both your current accounts are banned, will you be opening a third?

aidan_walsh

trawingtroll wrote:

So is this general "anon" muppetry, you fag?

Quite like that, yes.

Don't smoke, but thats for offering.

Boston

Jesus this thread is going down hill fast

Anyway copacetic there is a common sense rule in force. It doesn't take much cop on to know you shouldn't use a new account to get around a ban, otherwise what point did the ban serve?

copacetic

Boston wrote:

Jesus this thread is going down hill fast

Anyway copacetic there is a common sense rule in force. It doesn't take much cop on to know you shouldn't use a new account to get around a ban, otherwise what point did the ban serve?

Well I agree, but if it is the 'first commandment' of boards then we should probably have it written down?

Karl Hungus

copacetic wrote:

Well I agree, but if it is the 'first commandment' of boards then we should probably have it written down?

I do agree with this, and it should be made clear as possible.