Beer guts and unfair permanent bans.

Mr. Presentable

Karl Hungus wrote: »

All humour aside, I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of mods putting a user's fate to a public vote, regardless of whether Pighead is actually banned for more serious offenses which he isn't being forward about.

If the mods in question are either not bothered to come to a decision themselves, or simply want to put it to a vote in order to absolve themselves of the responsibility of making the ban permanant, it's something that simply should not happen. Maybe it was in the hope that Pighead would've rubbed enough people the wrong way and could somehow justify a permanent ban? I really, really don't like the idea of moderators here doing that kind of thing.

Spot on. Be in charge or don't be in charge.

My thoughts, for what they're worth. Pighead, much as I enjoy him, has transgressed more than once and perhaps once too often. Having said that, BGRH is run like a private club open to the public, with haphazard moderating and occasionally uninspired moderating; it's not the cuckoos nest, but neither is it PI and the moderating should be done in the spirit of what BGRH stands for and that includes with humour.

I rarely venture in there in spite of being qualified to do, but my feeling is that BGRH needs Pighead more than Pighead needs BGRH.

meditraitor

nipplenuts wrote: »

I rarely venture in there in spite of being qualified to do, but my feeling is that BGRH needs Pighead more than Pighead needs BGRH.

Well said young man........

6th

nipplenuts wrote: »

I rarely venture in there in spite of being qualified to do, but my feeling is that BGRH needs Pighead more than Pighead needs BGRH.

+1

Overheal

ive nothing against thaed as it be knownst, but saying cock in BGRH is not saying cock in the Ladies Lounge (haha, Nerin) and it was a bit silly to fire off a ban for that. perhaps when you disputed it though the other mods perhaps stepped in with their own opinions of you and decided it did not merit lifting as it was a convenient way to sweep you under the rug. Who knows. But judging from tom's formal PM that may have been the case.

Anyway it seems excessive for Modly Intervention to have occured here. Its not like it was a case of racism or some other situation that could not be settled by those already involved in the conversation - if anyone felt wronged they knew where the report button was.

Public polling sounded like a piss take in light of the ambience of the bgrh forum. in fact you have to take everything that pighead says with its rich, salty, bacony whole bodied flavor. well known for third person antics and brash comments hes a legend on the boards (wether for fame or infamy i leave to you)

And dear Mr Pighead if you havent learned to fear Ms Beruthiel's whip yet, you need to learn quickly

TequilaMockingBird

nipplenuts wrote: »

I rarely never venture in there in spite of being qualified to do, but my feeling is that BGRH needs Pighead more than Pighead needs BGRH.

I agree hun.

big b

Interesting reverse take on the old Groucho Marx quote about not wishing to join any club that would have him as a member.

Still, this is the guy who actually came second in a BGRH popularity poll.*

Admittedly, the winner was a plate of rasher sambos at a Barmitzvah, but still......


* may not have actually happened

Beruthiel

Overheal wrote: »

Ms Beruthiel's whip

Please don't encourage him!

dr.bollocko

I think BGRH is a better place for having Pighead in it.
That said I would like to hear what the BGRH mods Tom Dunne, robbo, trout or whitewashman have to say about it.

Tom Dunne

Well, well, well.

It is intriguing how Porky is trying his best to get back into BGRH and has to resort to portraying himself as the victim of the oppressive moderators. Yes, persecution, that's what we do in BGRH.

And it's interesting how he stoops to level of posting Private Messages without the sender's permission. That to me speaks volumes. It also reeks of desperation.

It's also interesting how he posts quotes out of context, showing how the big bad moderator's pick on him. It would be interesting to see the full story behind those posts.

This isn't about ordering mineral water in a pretend bar on the internet, this is about consistently provoking and rising other posters, including moderators, under the guise of "havin' the craic". It has gone on for long enough, and there comes a point where enough is enough. If one poster generates more closed threads, more reported posts, more PMs than any other poster, then as a moderator, I think it warrants attention.

This ban is that attention.

Now, as per the rules of Feedback, we have passed page three of this thread, so send in the cats.

Pighead

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Now, as per the rules of Feedback, we have passed page three of this thread, so send in the cats.

Not so fast Tom. Quick question. Do you think that the two bans that Pighead received were warrented (Rats Piss, Sudocream for Des's todger). A yes or no answer will suffice.

tbh

Tom Dunne wrote: »

stuff

I don't post in or read BGRH, so when you say what you've said above, that's good enough for me. Except:

And it's interesting how he stoops to level of posting Private Messages without the sender's permission. That to me speaks volumes. It also reeks of desperation.

imo, anything you send in PM as a mod is public property, as 6th has said. That's just common sense. I felt you had enough of a defence to make your defence without saying that

Overheal

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Well, well, well.

It is intriguing how Porky is trying his best to get back into BGRH and has to resort to portraying himself as the victim of the oppressive moderators. Yes, persecution, that's what we do in BGRH.

And it's interesting how he stoops to level of posting Private Messages without the sender's permission. That to me speaks volumes. It also reeks of desperation.

It's also interesting how he posts quotes out of context, showing how the big bad moderator's pick on him. It would be interesting to see the full story behind those posts.

This isn't about ordering mineral water in a pretend bar on the internet, this is about consistently provoking and rising other posters, including moderators, under the guise of "havin' the craic". It has gone on for long enough, and there comes a point where enough is enough. If one poster generates more closed threads, more reported posts, more PMs than any other poster, then as a moderator, I think it warrants attention.

This ban is that attention.

Now, as per the rules of Feedback, we have passed page three of this thread, so send in the cats.

(if youre on page 3 youre doing it wrong)

We have Opening Statements from the Prosecutor and the Defendant. Let this General Court Martial commence. Mr Dunne, you may call your first witness link. Please approach my bench with a beer too if you dont mind.

6th

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Now, as per the rules of Feedback, we have passed page three of this thread, so send in the cats.

Because you say so? I dont think so.

If you send a PM as a moderator then that PM should be able to be made public.

So some questions:

Did at one stage the folks of BGRH vote him back in and the vote results were changed by a mod?

Why put his return to the public vote? Do you do that for anyone else?

If your gonna put it to the vote when it suits you then why not listen to the fact that people want him in BGRH?

What were his bans for if not the posts he quoted?

Now I'm hardly a mod basher but something smells fishy.

cornbb

Tom Dunne wrote: »

It's also interesting how he posts quotes out of context, showing how the big bad moderator's pick on him. It would be interesting to see the full story behind those posts.

Please do enlighten us.

I understand that Pighead must be a handful to moderate in a generally laid-back forum like BGRH but you haven't actually managed to (or tried to) rebut any of his claims.

I'm not getting the impression that he's "rising" the overall userbase of BGRH, except maybe the moderators, any more than he does in AH. And despite the fact that he can cause mixed reactions, Pighead is a very popular poster in AH. Polls in BGRH would seem to indicate the same scenario there.

I would suggest that Pighead only succeeds in rising the BGRH mods, not the posters. Maybe this is a sneaky move on his part, but I would suggest that the BGRH mods take this with a pinch of salt and rise him back, without resorting to bannings that the wider userbase don't appear to agree with.

justsomebloke

Pighead wrote: »

Not so fast Tom. Quick question. Do you think that the two bans that Pighead received were warrented (Rats Piss, Sudocream for Des's todger). A yes or no answer will suffice.

I have to say as a regular poster in BGRH you have deserved all the bans you have gotten.

Even in a non serious forum. Trolling in jest is still trolling and should be dealt with.

Pighead

Tom Dunne wrote: »

It's also interesting how he posts quotes out of context, showing how the big bad moderator's pick on him. It would be interesting to see the full story behind those posts.

Out of context? Full story? Ok tell me the full story of the below exchange? What dastardly details has Pighead left out?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55688848&postcount=33
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55688888&postcount=35
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55689046&postcount=38
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55689069&postcount=40
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55689156&postcount=43

Tom Dunne wrote: »

This isn't about ordering mineral water in a pretend bar on the internet, this is about consistently provoking and rising other posters, including moderators, under the guise of "havin' the craic". It has gone on for long enough, and there comes a point where enough is enough. If one poster generates more closed threads, more reported posts, more PMs than any other poster, then as a moderator, I think it warrants attention.

This ban is that attention.

More closed threads?!! You're having a laugh. Pighead can remember two closed threads he caused and wait for it ONE OF THEM WAS YOUR THREAD ASKING IF PIGHEAD SHOULD BE LET BACK IN TO BGRH! Trout closed it due to it being full of fail. The other closed thread was a lighthearted thread Pighead started asking if girls should be allowed post in BGRH. Anyway throw up your links and jog Pigheads memory as to any other closed threads he's caused.

6th

jsb wrote: »

I have to say as a regular poster in BGRH you have deserved all the bans you have gotten.

Even in a non serious forum. Trolling in jest is still trolling and should be dealt with.

So you think the sudocream and ratpiss comments deserved a ban? Should I go looking for similar comments?

Dragan

Pighead as any kind of victim is just funny.

Come on people, we all know he takes the piss and it caught up with him in a Forum. It's all good Piggy, just move on and eventually you will end up back in again for some crazy reason.

Edit : none of those links are working Pighead!

togster

[IMG][/img]

Calina

tbh wrote: »

imo, anything you send in PM as a mod is public property, as 6th has said. That's just common sense. I felt you had enough of a defence to make your defence without saying that

I'm not absolutely sure I agree with this to be honest. Someone point out to me where it might be written. Otherwise, why bother with the PM route at all - let's go straight to feedback and lolcats?

as for OP, no straight opinion other than to say this: avoiding the harsh attention of mods is not hard. I did it for years myself before becoming a mod. Lots of harsh attention => hmmm...if you were to get back into the bar, how likely is it that your behaviour would change so as to cease attracting harsh attention? I mean, I loathe banning and infracting people. It takes away time out of my life that could be better spent doing other more productive stuff like reading Feedback.

Latchy

Nobody could ever accuse you of not doing your homework piggy

jaykay74

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Now, as per the rules of Feedback, we have passed page three of this thread, so send in the cats.

Maybe some solid evidence instead

faceman

The BGRH forum is turning into serious business all of a sudden. Maybe the imaginary taps ran out of imaginary beer?

Seifer

Calina wrote:

I'm not absolutely sure I agree with this to be honest. Someone point out to me where it might be written.

Why does it need to be written? If someone communicates with you in any form you can do what ever you want with the information they divulge. Whether you should or not is weighed against the consequences of doing so and is completely up to the individual involved.

Karl Hungus

Dragan wrote: »

Pighead as any kind of victim is just funny.

Come on people, we all know he takes the piss and it caught up with him in a Forum. It's all good Piggy, just move on and eventually you will end up back in again for some crazy reason.

Bollocks tbh. Regardless of whether it's Pighead or not, the public vote on his fate was totally innappropriate.

I'm not saying Pighead is innocent, I'm not even saying he doesn't deserve a ban, I'm saying that it's reprehensible treatment for any user, regardless of how he's rubbed you up the wrong way.

Star Lord

faceman wrote: »

The BGRH forum is turning into serious business all of a sudden. Maybe the imaginary taps ran out of imaginary beer?

While some of the individual reasons for the bans may seem ott, the constant trolling wears thin quite quickly. Pighead has his inspired moments of genius too, but generally I find it grating tbh...

tbh

Seifer wrote: »

Why does it need to be written? If someone communicates with you in any form you can do what ever you want with the information they divulge. Whether you should or not is weighed against the consequences of doing so and is completely up to the individual involved.

I think if I send someone a personal PM, for them to publish it is beyond the pale. However, if I send someone a PM as a mod, telling them why they've been banned or whatever, I'd expect that to become public if they ever went to feedback, and I'd assume most mods would write modly pm's with that in mind. Maybe not tho, you know what they say about ASS+U+MEing things.

justsomebloke

6th wrote: »

So you think the sudocream and ratpiss comments deserved a ban? Should I go looking for similar comments?

have you searched through all pigheads comments in BGRH both undeleted and deleted? Do you actually think he is first person in feedback to give a full unbiased account of his posts? And do you read the BGRH on a regular basis to be able to say what and what isn't trolling in that forum?

tallaght01

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

While some of the individual reasons for the bans may seem ott, the constant trolling wears thin quite quickly. Pighead has his inspired moments of genius too, but generally I find it grating tbh...

Is he really a troll? I think he's the funniest person on boards. I don't think the fact that he grates you is a reason for a permanent ban.

I wonder what a poll on the need for a pighead permaban would show?

6th

tallaght01 wrote: »

I wonder what a poll on the need for a pighead permaban would show?

Polls areonly done when its suits some people and when they dont get the results they want .... they change them.