Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Unfair ban from Christianity forum.

Options
123457

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=54492573

    :rolleyes: Hur, hur, hur...


  • Options
    #183
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    I just like to to say congratulations to Hivemind187 for the wonderful job of self promotion which he has turned this thread into.

    /me waits for a Crinnie vs Hivemind187 thread in humanities some time soon....


  • Options
    #184
    white_falcon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 793 ✭✭✭white_falcon


    aidan_walsh wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=54492573

    :rolleyes: Hur, hur, hur...

    well...after reading the forum charter there is nothing there saying that you cannot dis the mustard.

    just curious to see if moderators abuse their power :D


  • Options
    #185
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    white_falcon wrote: »
    well...after reading the forum charter there is nothing there saying that you cannot dis the mustard.

    just curious to see if moderators abuse their power :D
    Shame for you that the forum in question is the pet of an admin and owner. Kinda rules out any abuse of mod power, eh?


  • Options
    #186
    white_falcon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 793 ✭✭✭white_falcon


    aidan_walsh wrote: »
    Shame for you that the forum in question is the pet of an admin and owner. Kinda rules out any abuse of mod power, eh?


    does it? it doesnt say i cant get banned for talking badly about mustard in there so eh...

    anyhoo its a very boring day in work as usual and il do anything to make my day more interesting


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    Hivemind187
    Registered Users Posts: 5,021 ✭✭✭Hivemind187


    bonkey wrote: »
    If you can find a court who believes Santa is real, then you most certainly can. Good luck with that.


    Stop thinking about who the comment is made, and start thinking about who the comment is made to.

    If someone makes a poor-taste comment in jest, your position suggests that its only ok to get offended if its actually about them. If its about something they hold very dear, however, they can't. They've no grounds to be offended.

    I don't agree with that reasoning. If someone makes a hateful comment that applies not to me but to my wife, my parents, my siblings, my dead brother, my friends....I am absolutely and totally entitled to be offended.

    That the comment wasn't targetted specifically at me is not the issue.

    Either you allow that it is the intention of the person making the comment that matters, or how the comment is received. You don't get to cherry-pick back and forth, depending on which suits you in a given situation best.

    Again with the fallback that if you didn't attack an individual directly, its all ok.

    (edit to add)
    It reminds me so much of people coming on to the Politics forums making insulting comments about "some posters here" and then arguing that they never explicitly insulted anyone specific, and thus never attacked any specific poster. We banned them anyway.
    (edit end)

    Do what you like. Don't be surprised though, as you go through life, if you discover that other people also manage to take offence at comments that aren't attacking explicitly-named individuals. We'll just have to agree to disagree that thats the only way you can cause offence.

    So straight up, its alright for people to be murdered and burned for the percieved slights against Islam in a Danish newspaper?

    Thats the logical extention of your argument Bonkey.

    You are saying that anything that can be offensive to anyone is automatically wrong. I would point out that this means that everysingle thing anywhere is wrong.

    You're right about what I am saying to an extent. I do not believe that people should get upset over minor comments that refer to some fringe element of their psyche or about fictional characters. Thats ridiculous.

    They do get upset. Fine. But it is their problem.

    Let me put to you this way.

    If I take a knife and stab you with it, I am wrong.

    If I take a knife and throw it in the air, you catch it and proceed to stab yourself with it. Am I responsible?

    Yes its an analogy but it illustrates what I am saying.

    If I had said "jesus is a cnut" then I could accept that I got banned (even if I dont believe it was hurting any specific person) it would count (technically) as name calling. I didnt. I described him (a fictional character with no supporting evidence like Santa, the Easter Bunny and Optimus Prime) in a manner absurd to highlight the intrinsic absurdity of his story.

    The fact that you resort to telling me what will happen in my life later on for not letting myself be walked all over for the sake of a few peoples feelings is nonsense and irrelevant.


  • Options
    #188
    Hivemind187
    Registered Users Posts: 5,021 ✭✭✭Hivemind187


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    I just like to to say congratulations to Hivemind187 for the wonderful job of self promotion which he has turned this thread into.

    /me waits for a Crinnie vs Hivemind187 thread in humanities some time soon....

    Er ... what?

    I'm not publicising myself.

    I'm famous enough thanks ;)


  • Options
    #189
    popebenny16
    Registered Users Posts: 2,461 ✭✭✭popebenny16


    Hivemind187 wrote: »

    My argument wasnt to be silly, it was to highlight the silliness of something else. Please try to understand the difference.

    That isnt Argument of Absurdity, though, and you've been saying all along that was what you were employing.
    Hivemind187 wrote: »

    And can we leave crotches out of it? Not that I dislike them, only they are irrelevant to the proceedings.

    Ah, yes, I was referencing your post:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=54491425&postcount=160

    Where you suggested that my post was "crotch-centric"

    To be fair, you are the first person I have met to refer to "taking the piss" as crotch-centric. There's a forum for that, too, you know.


  • Options
    #190
    white_falcon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 793 ✭✭✭white_falcon


    popebenny16 wrote: »
    That isnt Argument of Absurdity, though, and you've been saying all along that was what you were employing.



    Ah, yes, I was referencing your post:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=54491425&postcount=160

    Where you suggested that my post was "crotch-centric"

    To be fair, you are the first person I have met to refer to "taking the piss" as crotch-centric. There's a forum for that, too, you know.


    man im learning about a heap of new forums today! wheres this "crotch centric" forum you speak of?


  • Options
    #191
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    white_falcon wrote: »
    well...after reading the forum charter there is nothing there saying that you cannot dis the mustard.

    just curious to see if moderators abuse their power :D

    Replace mod with Admin. I've seen site bans for less in that forum.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    krazy_8s wrote: »
    Replace mod with Admin. I've seen site bans for less in that forum.
    Dissing mustard on the mustard forum is like walking into an NRA meeting and declaring that you're in a gay relationship with a black man.


  • Options
    #193
    white_falcon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 793 ✭✭✭white_falcon


    krazy_8s wrote: »
    Replace mod with Admin. I've seen site bans for less in that forum.


    smeh. truth is I hate mustard. maybe il become a marter for all mustard haters...or maybe il just get banned... ah well. i hate freakin mustard. we shud have an "I hate mustard forum"...actuallly....


  • Options
    #194
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    Hivemind187 wrote: »
    As for giving them reasons ... I should roll over and grease myself up because its suits the mood of a moderator?
    I'm not suggesting rolling over. I'm suggesting that sometimes even though you don't agree with the logic of a ruling, particularly when that ruling is regarding you being insulting, you should accept others' words and move on. Oftentimes it's simply the best approach.
    white_falcon wrote: »
    we shud have an "I hate mustard forum"...actuallly....
    What would you think of people coming in to that forum simply to argue that mustard tastes good? What if they then accused the "I hate mustard forum" regulars of simply being blind to good taste? If you were the mod, would you allow such actions? Would you ban the posters? If not, what's the point of having an "I hate mustard" forum, if it were to become the home of the mustard fans?

    Oh and speaking of being a martyr for mustard haters, they've already been site-banned. I don't particularly like mustard so I stay out of the Mustard forum. That seems to make more sense to me than being inflammatory there.


  • Options
    #195
    white_falcon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 793 ✭✭✭white_falcon


    Ibid wrote: »
    I'm not suggesting rolling over. I'm suggesting that sometimes even though you don't agree with the logic of a ruling, particularly when that ruling is regarding you being insulting, you should accept others' words and move on. Oftentimes it's simply the best approach.


    What would you think of people coming in to that forum simply to argue that mustard tastes good? What if they then accused the "I hate mustard forum" regulars of simply being blind to good taste? If you were the mod, would you allow such actions? Would you ban the posters? If not, what's the point of having an "I hate mustard" forum, if it were to become the home of the mustard fans?

    Oh and speaking of being a martyr for mustard haters, they've already been site-banned. I don't particularly like mustard so I stay out of the Mustard forum. That seems to make more sense to me than being inflammatory there.


    hahahah only on a site like boards could u be banned for rising up against mustard lol...


  • Options
    #196
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    How in the name of God (har har) has this card not been played yet:

    tirelessrebutter.jpg


  • Options
    #197
    WhiteWashMan
    Registered Users Posts: 20,099 ✭✭✭✭WhiteWashMan


    Hivemind187 wrote: »
    Er ... what?

    I'm not publicising myself.

    I'm famous enough thanks ;)

    dude, let me give you some advice.

    you may be correct in what you say, and you be unfairly banned in your point of view. personally, i dont know why oud be banned for the jewish zombie thing. seems abusrd to me, but i dont run the forum, and i dont know how strict the forum is.

    while i dont agree that you should be banned for that, as moderators, our role is really to ensure that a forum runs smoothly, and that means using our common sense to know when to keep out a disruptive influence.
    unfortunately, none of us have a god given and devine right to post whatever we want, or whatever we feel is acceptable in these forums.

    i think the ban was correct. i think however, it was for the wrong reason.

    i can understand you wanting to pu your view across, but after the first 5 posts on this thread (or any thread like it) were really down to pedantacism and point scoring. nothing is ever achieved after the first 5 posts :)

    accept the ban. it wont be over turned, and its certainloy not worthy of any admin intervention. and even if you were readmitted, what would you do? go in and post again? probably not. if you did, youd just get banned for trolling at that stage :)

    which, admittedly, would be humourous for those of us who dont have any involvment :)

    oh, and have a reat day. its sunny and 30 degrees here. i must go out and do some gardening.


  • Options
    #198
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    The original comment was impressive in a way, in managing to be offensive to Christianity, Judaism, non-religious Jews, Vodoun, Santeria, Candomble, Lucumi, and Macumba in so few words.

    That's an admirable economy of expression.

    In all, a tosser, but an impressive tosser.

    The whole claiming the ban was unfair thing takes it too far though, and is just stupid.


  • Options
    #199
    togster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭togster


    Is it ok to call people tossers now... if so your a bleedin tosser.


  • Options
    #200
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    Yes. It's really cutting to say the thing that's just been said previously. In the face of such a biting put-down I quiver.


  • Options
    #201
    togster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭togster


    Talliesin wrote: »
    Yes. It's really cutting to say the thing that's just been said previously. In the face of such a biting put-down I quiver.

    I wasn't trying to put you down Tallesin. Really i think you need love tbh... maybe you wouldn't be so bitter.

    *Hugs and kisses*

    PS if you ever need to talk... im here for ya :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Talliesin wrote: »
    The original comment was impressive in a way, in managing to be offensive to Christianity, Judaism, non-religious Jews, Vodoun, Santeria, Candomble, Lucumi, and Macumba in so few words.
    O_O

    Jeez Louise!

    I'm tempted to ask for an explanation of the more esoteric of those, but knowing Tallie, it would be a 2,000 word essay, and I'd hate to waste his Saturday night like that. :D


  • Options
    #203
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    togster wrote: »
    maybe you wouldn't be so bitter.
    I'm not bitter. Life is good.
    randylonghorn wrote: »
    I'm tempted to ask for an explanation of the more esoteric of those, but knowing Tallie, it would be a 2,000 word essay, and I'd hate to waste his Saturday night like that. :D
    Nah, this one's easy. Vodoun, Santeria, Candomble, Lucumi, and Macumba all have certain similarities to each other. You can probably work out the rest.


  • Options
    #204
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    Wow, 11 pages about the most obviously correct forum banning I've seen. Clearly inflamatory and inciteful. Don't get cute with us, we arent bound by a rule book you can lawyer because we don't have one.

    The rest, I didnt read. Too long.

    DeV.


  • Options
    #205
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    DeVore wrote: »
    Wow, 11 pages
    You have the default 20 posts per page instead of 40?

    See, that's why you can't manage to read all of boards any more. :)


  • Options
    #206
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    Talliesin wrote: »
    You have the default 20 posts per page instead of 40?

    See, that's why you can't manage to read all of boards any more. :)


    You mean to tell me that the Admins don't read every single post? I think you have just shattered my last illusion about boards.


  • Options
    #207
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    Actually, it's kinda scary how long DeV kept that rate of surveilance up for. Just as Coleridge is said to be the last person to have read everything, DeV is the last person to have read everything on boards.


  • Options
    #208
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    I read everything on AH.
    That's why you should vote for me for Mod of the year.

    Ok. I've shamelessly plugged myself yet again.
    You can close this thread now.


  • Options
    #209
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    I had the sense to quit. That's why I should be in the running :(


  • Options
    #210
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Terry wrote: »
    Ok. I've shamelessly plugged myself yet again.
    Honestly, dude ...we would prefer not to know! :(

    What you do in the privacy of your own home is your own business!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    WhiteWashMan
    Registered Users Posts: 20,099 ✭✭✭✭WhiteWashMan


    Talliesin wrote: »
    Actually, it's kinda scary how long DeV kept that rate of surveilance up for. Just as Coleridge is said to be the last person to have read everything, DeV is the last person to have read everything on boards.

    actually, i think you'll find victor was the last person to read everything on boards. he was going long after tom quit his boards.ie job to get a night job.


Advertisement