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
Is this ban OTT?
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
It's so sad that there are people here (not just cheesedude) who view the above as a sign of weakness or failure.
you could argue that it's equally sad that there are people here who find it sad that there are people here (not just cheesedude) who view the above as a sign of weakness or failure.
The guy is entitled to an opinion, whether you and I agree with him or not is really irrelevant, and his opinions don't make him any better or worse than you or me.
The reality is, the way he expressed that opinion just paints him as a muppet to anyone who's opinion would really count anyway. So that's his "punishment". That, and the fact that as long as he thinks it's acceptible to express yourself like that, he'll never have any influence, anywhere really.
But the fact that those are the values he holds, and that those principles that are important to him, doesn't make him sad, just different.
And tbh, that's why I thought the ban was harsh. I felt marksies original post (childish blah blah) was judgemental. I get that marksie feels that the op is in the wrong for thinking the way he does. Just express your opinion, intelligent people know the score with people like cheesedude.
Having said that tho, I had never heard of the guy before this thread, if he's posting crap all over the place then it's the final straw, and that's fair enough.
I'm just wondering tho if this is part of an effort to "up the tone" on certain boards. I'm all for it, if it is, but lets set the rules out for everyone
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
As for the initial ban, I totally agree with it..
we are not in the business of banning people based on their opinion, and as far as i can see, the initial name calling came from marksie, so i dont agree with it. youve qualified it somehow how on a ranking of misbehaviour. the problem with that is where do you draw the line. for me, if two people go at it, i let them, or i ban both. any other way is just unfair.
Im also not sure how you can ban someone from a forum over a PM row. does that mean if someone pm's me something silly, I can ask you to ban them from the entire Rec and Biz catagories? I dont think I understand how that works.
I also think Marksie is big enough to stand up for himself, and it really does appear to be a case of handbags at dawn. heres a hint for you, when i was modding PI, if you start to post as a user, never enter the thread as a mod.
and the same stands for me on any other forum I mod now. if i am involved in a discussion as a user, i wont moderate it. which is why ive never banned anyone who abused me in a debate
Although, i do agree that I find a lot of Cheesedudes opinions untasteful to say the least, and personally, i dont tend to take on board anything he says.
for me though, marksie made the correct decision to hand off to gordon.0 -
-
-
Spot on WWM and agree completely.WhiteWashMan wrote: »we are not in the business of banning people based on their opinion, and as far as i can see, the initial name calling came from marksie, so i dont agree with it. youve qualified it somehow how on a ranking of misbehaviour. the problem with that is where do you draw the line. for me, if two people go at it, i let them, or i ban both. any other way is just unfair.
Im also not sure how you can ban someone from a forum over a PM row. does that mean if someone pm's me something silly, I can ask you to ban them from the entire Rec and Biz catagories? I dont think I understand how that works.
I also think Marksie is big enough to stand up for himself, and it really does appear to be a case of handbags at dawn. heres a hint for you, when i was modding PI, if you start to post as a user, never enter the thread as a mod.
and the same stands for me on any other forum I mod now. if i am involved in a discussion as a user, i wont moderate it. which is why ive never banned anyone who abused me in a debate
Although, i do agree that I find a lot of Cheesedudes opinions untasteful to say the least, and personally, i dont tend to take on board anything he says.
for me though, marksie made the correct decision to hand off to gordon.
Also agree with tbh regarding everyone being entitled to their opinions.0 -
-
Do you think the likes of the Phelps and Eugene Terreblanche are entitled to their opinions, which they then use to hatemonger? (And not to the extent of breaking the law).
No, I don't believe people are entitled to have hateful opinions at all.
Yes I do. Because, who decides what opinions are valid, and which are not? It's easy to defend the right to free speech for those people you agree with, but I'd argue it's more important to defend those rights for people you don't agree with. Because otherwise, you're just pushing your own agenda. (I don't mean you personally, none of this is really aimed at you personally, just generally).It's not a case of whether it matches mine or not, it's a case of whether it's an opinion that denigrates particular people or groups.
well, your opinion above denegrates Fred Phelps and Eugene Terreblanch, right? So you kind of are saying that opinions which match yours are fine. Personally, I'd prefer Fred Phelps to say what he wants, and have people laugh at him like they laughed at Cheesedude. Most people are pretty clever. You don't need to protect them from posters like cheesedude.With respect, you didn't read what i said properly. I didn't call anyone sad, I said I think it's sad that there are people who feel it's somehow a character flaw of Marksie's to have overlooked that girl's past.
thank you for the respect I re-read your comment, and you are correct, I understand the difference between what you said and what I said you said. My Bad. However, the point still stands - so what if you think it's sad? it's still a valid point of view, just not one with which you agree. Do you see what I mean? 0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
i see where your coming from,norrie rugger wrote: »"damned database errors"
Very much agreed
I know it is afairly bad example, just wary of setting precedent that opinion begins to have more importance than a defined set of rules.
As for the topic in question?
Where is the insult in "why did you not marry? have kids?"
easy answer is that they "did not fall that much in love, what is it to you?"
That survey was widely reported (if my drink addled memory recalls correctly).
If the OP has that opinion of women on the game, then it is the obligation of the posters to either attack that opinion with facts or figures to nullify this opinion not ignore (ban) the person with this opinion
He made a comment, was told this was childish etc (that was not an attack on the post as it gave no reasons as to why it was childish etc) and he replied with a quote from a, small and localised, study as to why he held this opinion.
It would have been very easy to negate this argument with a structured responce, not a ban
but if i said, as regards your post, thats a silly response, i wouldnt expect to be in trouble for saying it,even if i didnt back it up. fair enough,my argument isnt great if i just say that opinion is crap, but its not like im saying to you, you sir,are a plank. if i did that with no reason,no back up, i'm sure i'd be told off.
as for the op, take this example, if i wnet into a thread that a rape victim had started in PI, and said, ugh rape victims are so whiney or something equally stupid and uncalled for, i should get a smack. then if i started PMing the mod and being mouthy,i'd expect more smackage.
when going into certain threads,especially in PI, people should be a little more respectful and understanding imo. i mean, of course there is tough love type responses, but then there is trolling.
que Nerin screaming at laptop trying to post this reply:rolleyes: 0 -
i see where your coming from,
but if i said, as regards your post, thats a silly response, i wouldnt expect to be in trouble for saying it,even if i didnt back it up. fair enough,my argument isnt great if i just say that opinion is crap, but its not like im saying to you, you sir,are a plank. if i did that with no reason,no back up, i'm sure i'd be told off.
as for the op, take this example, if i wnet into a thread that a rape victim had started in PI, and said, ugh rape victims are so whiney or something equally stupid and uncalled for, i should get a smack. then if i started PMing the mod and being mouthy,i'd expect more smackage.
when going into certain threads,especially in PI, people should be a little more respectful and understanding imo. i mean, of course there is tough love type responses, but then there is trolling.
que Nerin screaming at laptop trying to post this reply:rolleyes:
Should you get a smack for voicing your opinion? never
And just because the mod has the ability to deliver the smack does not make it ok.
If a mod is able to dish out comments then they should take it.
"So I know how silly, childish and immature such as this post is."
This is a comment on the opinion of the poster not the post
As for respectful and understanding posts: Most would love that but, unfortunately, not everyone online has that view. They would have the view that if you want that then do not post in a publically accessed forum, if you do not want all kinds of replies (and to an extent I agree)0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement