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
Banned from Parenting Forum
Options
Comments
-
Hill Billy wrote: »On the basis that the lot of you are continuing to act like children, if I were Thaed I'd be of a mind to keep you all in the 'Ban-Corner' for the forseeable future & not let you back into the 'Parenting Playhouse' until you promised by PM to behave yourselves.
How am I acting like a child? I agree the usual suspects are, but I don't believe I am.
I hate "I Got Banned!!?!!!!!" threads as much as the next person, they're usually totally deserved bans. I don't recall one ever being over-turned, just the OP getting alot of cat-picz. But Feedback is the only place I can discuss this, in my usual calm, reasonable manner.
0 -
-
How am I acting like a child? I agree the usual suspects are, but I don't believe I am.
I hate "I Got Banned!!?!!!!!" threads as much as the next person, they're usually totally deserved bans. I don't recall one ever being over-turned, just the OP getting alot of cat-picz. But Feedback is the only place I can discuss this, in my usual calm, reasonable manner.
with respect
Hill billys post was quite a general comment, and it was fairly innocuous. If you had just ignored it, that would have been it. But instead you reacted to it, and quoted it, which just brings it all to attention again and makes people read his post again, with probably more of them agreeing with it. And for what? So you could make a pretty worthless point (imo) - of course you are not going to think you were acting like a child - who would admit that in a situation like this? It was pretty much a given, so you kind of scored an own goal in that situation. And see that's kind of the point.
If you had just ignored ntlbells comments in the post, then ntlbell would have gotten bored and moved on. And what's the point in replying anyway? It's pretty obvious that most reasonable people wouldn't agree with him anyway, so why react to it?
See, that's what adults do. They know which battles are worth fighting.0 -
with respect
Hill billys post was quite a general comment, and it was fairly innocuous. If you had just ignored it, that would have been it. But instead you reacted to it, and quoted it, which just brings it all to attention again and makes people read his post again, with probably more of them agreeing with it. And for what? So you could make a pretty worthless point (imo) - of course you are not going to think you were acting like a child - who would admit that in a situation like this? It was pretty much a given, so you kind of scored an own goal in that situation. And see that's kind of the point.
If you had just ignored ntlbells comments in the post, then ntlbell would have gotten bored and moved on. And what's the point in replying anyway? It's pretty obvious that most reasonable people wouldn't agree with him anyway, so why react to it?
See, that's what adults do. They know which battles are worth fighting.
You see that is where you are wrong where ntlbell is concerned, He is like a dog with a bone, he is relentless, he will just keep on and on and ariston the whole time.....
Even if the comment is not directed to him, he will still manage to troll it.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
with respect
Hill billys post was quite a general comment, and it was fairly innocuous. If you had just ignored it, that would have been it. But instead you reacted to it, and quoted it, which just brings it all to attention again and makes people read his post again, with probably more of them agreeing with it. And for what? So you could make a pretty worthless point (imo) - of course you are not going to think you were acting like a child - who would admit that in a situation like this? It was pretty much a given, so you kind of scored an own goal in that situation. And see that's kind of the point.
If you had just ignored ntlbells comments in the post, then ntlbell would have gotten bored and moved on. And what's the point in replying anyway? It's pretty obvious that most reasonable people wouldn't agree with him anyway, so why react to it?
See, that's what adults do. They know which battles are worth fighting.
I agree with your comments regarding ntbell. I am ignoring him, now. I reporting him for trolling again this morning, and as I have learned, I'll ignore him and leave it at that.
As for Hill Billys comments, and yours I feel I'm replying to them reasonably, and disagreeing with some of your points, not being childish. No nobody likes to be called such a thing, including me, so I will try and explain/defend myself. But yourself and Hill Billy aren't trying to troll and wind me up. Your giving your opinions in a rational way, which is cool, they are your opinions, it doesn't mean though that my replying to them is in any way an own goal.0 -
-
he's not tho. I think we all agree on the fact that if someone is abusive and insulting to other posters on a thread in ANY forum, they will be banned.I think it is unfair that he is allowed be abusive and to insult posters.
The question is then, what constitutes someone being abusive and insulting? I can be insulted by a seemingly innocent remark, and I may not be insulted by an outright character assassination in other cases. It's all about context. And on this site, the context is decided by the mods. That's just the way it is, like it or lump it. If there were no mods, every thread would be like the thunderdome. Sometimes a mod isn't going to agree with you that you've been insulted, and usually they are right. This isn't because they are all knowing, just that they are (or should be) impartial. In these cases, you just have to suck it up, and get on with the thread, rather than keep sniping back to the original comments, which in fairness, both of ye were doing.
Ultimately, ye achieved nothing really and you only hurt yourselves. . you're both banned, the forum continues without you, and all because you couldn't let it go...like ntlbell gives two craps about whether he's banned in there or not. I don't know, but I doubt you see him trolling the poker forum, because obviously he enjoys it (I'm assuming a lot from your location thingy) and he's got too much to lose. I hate to say it, but he won he was trying to get a rise out of ye, and ye handed it to him on a plate. If you'd ignored him, he'd be the only one banned. And as I said, everything you both said in the thread was only what we all knew anyway. 0 -
Advertisement
-
-
he's not tho. I think we all agree on the fact that if someone is abusive and insulting to other posters on a thread in ANY forum, they will be banned.
The question is then, what constitutes someone being abusive and insulting? I can be insulted by a seemingly innocent remark, and I may not be insulted by an outright character assassination in other cases. It's all about context. And on this site, the context is decided by the mods. That's just the way it is, like it or lump it. If there were no mods, every thread would be like the thunderdome. Sometimes a mod isn't going to agree with you that you've been insulted, and usually they are right. This isn't because they are all knowing, just that they are (or should be) impartial. In these cases, you just have to suck it up, and get on with the thread, rather than keep sniping back to the original comments, which in fairness, both of ye were doing.
Ultimately, ye achieved nothing really and you only hurt yourselves. . you're both banned, the forum continues without you, and all because you couldn't let it go...like ntlbell gives two craps about whether he's banned in there or not. I don't know, but I doubt you see him trolling the poker forum, because obviously he enjoys it (I'm assuming a lot from your location thingy) and he's got too much to lose. I hate to say it, but he won he was trying to get a rise out of ye, and ye handed it to him on a plate. If you'd ignored him, he'd be the only one banned. And as I said, everything you both said in the thread was only what we all knew anyway.
This isn't just about ntbell, there were alot of other unnecessary comments on that thread, he was just one of them. I didn't break the charter and therefore I don't believe I should have been banned. This thread isn't about ntbell or anyone else, it is about me questioning a decision made about me, which I think was harsh.0 -
-
My posts in Feedback are not having a pop at individuals – just highlighting how far this whole thing has gotten out of hand. Thaed has a tough job to do in Parenting & like I mentioned in a previous post – the ban-hammer isn’t a precision instrument.
I know that tempers are frayed at the moment, but it is often best to let these things die a quick death so we can get back to the Parenting forum & discuss our issues, aspirations, loves/hates & fears in a calm & rational fashion.
If other posters are píssing you off - report them if necessary, let the mods deal with them, you ignore them & move on.
Let's brush this thread's teeth & put it to bed. I'll read you all a story if that helps. 0 -
-
Yes but thaed agreed that he is a troll and that if it was up to her he would be site banned.
he has been abusive to me in several posts since last night. I have reported them all.
Anyhow, I have made my points, I have not objected to my ban. I will in future report rather than react.
I like to think that I will have learned something from this situation. fair play.
and sue: you did break the charter. every post you made about ntls behaviour was off-topic. You continued to do it after the mod told you to stop. The content of what you posted doesn't matter - doesn't matter if you were right or not. It's off topic.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement