Warning for insulting behaviour

rovert · 08-09-2008 11:44am

Bubs101 wrote: »

Not what I think and I'm not alone, Minto said that the state of the forum was the reason that there's no podcast and that the only reason he stayed around was for the draft.

Well you are wrong relative speaking this incident is a isolated one. If you go on the general goings on in the Pro Wrestling forum for the last couple of weeks.

Bubs101 wrote: »

You are the only one who takes umbridge with people posting from anything other than the Observer.

This isn’t simply true. Either you are embellishing thinks to make me look bad or you really haven’t taken in anything I’ve said to about this. Which wouldn’t my or even Fozzy's fault was we have both have gone into this a number of times with you over and over. Even the fact I said reliable sources indicates there is more than one. I said this before I dont mind people posting from unreliable sources if they are using it to back up an agruement.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I didn't report you for that, you voiced your disdain for unreliable sources, fair enough. I have told you many times what posts I reported you for, which happened before I even posted the link, so don't try to say I got pissed off at you for dismissing my posting of unreliable sources. I PM'd Fozzy with the two quotes that annoyed me when I reported you.

Did I say you did?

Bubs101 · 08-09-2008 11:53am

rovert wrote: »

Well you are wrong relative speaking this incident is a isolated one. If you go on the general goings on in the Pro Wrestling forum for the last couple of weeks.

It's not an isolated incident. Since I joined I have never seen a wrestling thread in feedback until the last 6 weeks when there were two, both focused around you

rovert wrote: »

This isn’t simply true.

It simply is. I'll wait for somebody else to come in and back me up.

rovert · 08-09-2008 12:00pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

It's not an isolated incident. Since I joined I have never seen a wrestling thread in feedback until the last 6 weeks when there were two, both focused around you.

Bubs you are falling into your old trap of not reading others posts properly again. Six weeks is longer than a couple thanks for proving my point.

Bubs101 wrote: »

It simply is. I'll wait for somebody else to come in and back me up.

If it is that simple prove it yourself instead of inciting people to gang up on me.

dub_skav · 08-09-2008 12:13pm

rovert wrote: »

Thank you for your even minded post. Not only did Fozzy give the wrong heading, I had to ask him numerous times via PM for just an explanation. By his own admission he had a hard time clearly justifying it. The rational for the warning has flip flopped between the language I used and my style, cumulative previous behavior to just one post. I am confused by it all, sorry.

Again I don’t think what I wrote was insulting or abusive. Again I was referring to an idea not a person. It was the operative word and there was a very good reason (which has been further validated last night at the PPV SPOILER ALERT!) why I said it.

I think you have gotten all the explanation that you are going to.

My advice would be to leave the thread lie. All that is happening now is off topic bickering

Bubs101 · 08-09-2008 12:33pm

rovert wrote: »

Bubs you are falling into your old trap of not reading others posts properly again. Six weeks is longer than a couple thanks for proving my point.

Turns out it was started on the 26th of August so that would make it just under 2 weeks since this one was started. 2 Feedback threads in 2 weeks, how do you not get the message

rovert · 08-09-2008 12:47pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

Turns out it was started on the 26th of August so that would make it just under 2 weeks since this one was started. 2 Feedback threads in 2 weeks, how do you not get the message

That stemmed from me making a joke which I thought was uniformly understandable, it back fired I was wrong, I admitted that. Regardless how long ago it was, I took it upon myself to change how I may come across (in actual fact I started doing that way before that feedback thread.) If you can’t notice that change generally speaking then you are totally irrational in your view of me and my posts. Ly5by5 and yourself seem to be more interested in attacking me than actually talking about Wrestling in the Pro Wrestling forum. It least the posts I made in this thread are comparable in amount to which I posted over there.

08-09-2008 12:48pm

I demand that 20 minutes back OP.

Clearly wanting attention from the evidence spread throughout this thread.

rovert · 08-09-2008 12:50pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

Turns out it was started on the 26th of August so that would make it just under 2 weeks since this one was started. 2 Feedback threads in 2 weeks, how do you not get the message

That stemmed from me making a joke which I thought was uniformly understandable, it back fired I was wrong, I admitted that. Regardless how long ago it was, I took it upon myself to change how I may come across (in actual fact I started doing that way before that feedback thread.) If you can’t notice that change generally speaking then you are totally irrational in your view of me and my posts. Ly5by5 and yourself seem to be more interested in attacking me than actually talking about Wrestling in the Pro Wrestling forum going by this thread. At least the number of posts I made in this thread are comparable in amount to which I posted over there.

ShawnRaven · 08-09-2008 1:57pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

Alternatively, could just make VR a mod, get him to permaban Rovert and then strip him of his modship

I take somewhat exception to this remark, there are way better candidates for that, yourself and kentonbomb would be two i'd use off the top of my head!

VR!

ShawnRaven · 08-09-2008 2:02pm

the flananator wrote: »

All in all I would say this has been the greatest meltdown since Hellbilly's exit from the IWW boards all those years ago. Thank you rovert, and goodbye.

Bwahah, those were the days. Man, he showed me so much man love. The fact that it was unrequieted, i believe is what caused said meltdown.

I'm actually pro bombidol, sure he lurks, but he step in when he has to. Trust me, i've seen posts vanish and locked quick sharp due to him. Plus he's been around since 2002 when the forum started, so surely he has to be doing something right.

Another mod isn't the solution A 2 mod PW forum worked fine from 2004 up until six months ago, there's only one solution. Everyone knows what it is, but unfortunately nobody seems to have the scrotes to pull the damn trigger already!

VR!

orestes · 08-09-2008 2:09pm

By the time this thread is finished up with the warning will have expired already.

This kind of thing is exactly why I don't drop by the pw forum much anymore to be honest. Rovert asks a question or a comment, gets an answer or a reply, and if he doesn't like it you get three pages of pedantic interrogation and nit-picking until you just gotta give up trying to reason with him.

I've backed rovert up in the past, even did so in the other feedback thread, but this kind of thing is just ridiculous. If you don't like it here and can't play nicely with the other kids in the forum, why not just go play somewhere else?

Doctor DooM · 08-09-2008 2:34pm

orestes wrote: »

By the time this thread is finished up with the warning will have expired already.

This kind of thing is exactly why I don't drop by the pw forum much anymore to be honest. Rovert asks a question or a comment, gets an answer or a reply, and if he doesn't like it you get three pages of pedantic interrogation and nit-picking until you just gotta give up trying to reason with him.

I've backed rovert up in the past, even did so in the other feedback thread, but this kind of thing is just ridiculous. If you don't like it here and can't play nicely with the other kids in the forum, why not just go play somewhere else?

Which, if I recall, I called at the start of the thread, and told Rovert I would not engage in, and I haven't.

All this nit picking, pedantism, picking on rovert, then rovert avoiding the core point doesn't change in the slighest fact that all rovert needs to listen to to make this issue vanish forever is on pages 1-4 of this thread. No offense.

rovert · 08-09-2008 2:40pm

validreasoning! wrote: »

Another mod isn't the solution A 2 mod PW forum worked fine from 2004 up until six months ago, there's only one solution. Everyone knows what it is, but unfortunately nobody seems to have the scrotes to pull the damn trigger already!

I’m sorry that you had a homophobic over reaction to an in joke I posted, VR. Lets face it I haven’t wished death on someone, you have and you are still here. I’ve never came close to posting something like that.

orestes wrote: »

By the time this thread is finished up with the warning will have expired already.

This kind of thing is exactly why I don't drop by the pw forum much anymore to be honest. Rovert asks a question or a comment, gets an answer or a reply, and if he doesn't like it you get three pages of pedantic interrogation and nit-picking until you just gotta give up trying to reason with him.

An example of this would be? As I cant think of any. Again this isn’t about the severity of the warning.

orestes wrote: »

I've backed rovert up in the past, even did so in the other feedback thread, but this kind of thing is just ridiculous. If you don't like it here and can't play nicely with the other kids in the forum, why not just go play somewhere else?

I do like it here, more people have a problem with me then I do with them. They tend exaggerate my behavior or make unsubstantiated claims about it in the hope one day I may actually live up to it.

rovert · 08-09-2008 2:42pm

SDooM wrote: »

Which, if I recall, I called at the start of the thread, and told Rovert I would not engage in, and I haven't.

All this nit picking, pedantism, picking on rovert, then rovert avoiding the core point doesn't change in the slighest fact that all rovert needs to listen to to make this issue vanish forever is on pages 1-4 of this thread. No offense.

How have I avoided the core point exactly? I have probably answered every point in this thread in fairness.

Ive never gotten a definitvie answer whether If I can call peoples ideas dumb if it is the operative word in these four pages.

Vince135792003 · 08-09-2008 3:36pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

Not that I think and I'm not alone, Minto said that the state of the forum was the reason that there's no podcast and that the only reason he stayed around was for the draft

It seems like alot of the regular contributors have disappeared over the last couple of months.

Sully · 08-09-2008 3:54pm

rovert can you not just take the advise from the users and mods, move on and try address the problems? This thread has been addressed several times but you refuse to listen.

Will · 08-09-2008 3:59pm

It's just a warning, a slap on the wrist.

For the wrestling heads amongst us, it's like getting a clothes-line, it hurts for a lil bit but you get back up and continue playing, except with any luck a lil differently so you don't get hit again.

Doctor DooM · 08-09-2008 4:03pm

rovert wrote: »

How have I avoided the core point exactly? I have probably answered every point in this thread in fairness.

Ive never gotten a definitvie answer whether If I can call peoples ideas dumb if it is the operative word in these four pages.

thats not the point you were arguing then, you were going on about inconsistency of moderating. I told you why this was irrelivant, and you spun off, so I didn't bother.

If you called a post dumb and were not being humourous in my forum I would give you a warning: to be fair I cant speak for another mod in another forum.

orestes · 08-09-2008 4:06pm

rovert wrote: »

An example of this would be? As I cant think of any. Again this isn’t about the severity of the warning.

This very thread.

You asked a question, you were answered by posters and mods from both inside and outside of the wrestling forum, but you are just refusing to listen to anybody and just keep going and now we have a 100-odd post thread where everyone is telling you the same thing but you won't listen because you just won't consider anyone else's point of view.

rovert · 08-09-2008 4:29pm

Sully wrote: »

rovert can you not just take the advise from the users and mods, move on and try address the problems? This thread has been addressed several times but you refuse to listen.

I have listened. How can I move when there is still ambiguity existing in what I’m asking?

Will wrote: »

It's just a warning, a slap on the wrist.

For the billionth time it isn’t about the severity of the warning.

SDooM wrote: »

thats not the point you were arguing then, you were going on about inconsistency of moderating. I told you why this was irrelivant, and you spun off, so I didn't bother.

Look at my OP it wasn’t what I was mainly arguing about, I did even mention. The inconsistency thing only popped in the thread, as I’ve said numerous times it was a result of a clear misunderstand on both sides, the moderator and myself. I’ve acknowledged that it was a misunderstanding, apologized for my part in it and more on pages ago. It is a dead issue if you have read the thread you would know this and I’ve said it over and over.

SDooM wrote: »

If you called a post dumb and were not being humourous in my forum I would give you a warning: to be fair I cant speak for another mod in another forum.

But I attacked the post not the poster which is the key rule of boards. Dumb was operative word like it or not in this occasion. Again we all have bad ideas; there is nothing rude about point that out. So going forward can I refer to other people's ideas as dumb and not face a warning? Where does the sliding scale of words begin and end.

orestes wrote: »

This very thread.

You asked a question, you were answered by posters and mods from both inside and outside of the wrestling forum, but you are just refusing to listen to anybody and just keep going and now we have a 100-odd post thread where everyone is telling you the same thing but you won't listen because you just won't consider anyone else's point of view.

Id seriously ask you to read the thread again if this your view. Ive moved on from numerous things which indicates that yes I did ask a number of questions not just one, that I did listen to all of posters. Too bad they havent listened to me as I find myself repeating myself over and over again.

Handsome Bob · 08-09-2008 4:37pm

rovert wrote: »

I have listened. How can I move when there is still ambiguity existing in what I’m asking?

For the billionth time it isn’t about the severity of the warning.

Look at my OP it wasn’t what I was mainly arguing about, I did even mention. The inconsistency thing only popped in the thread, as I’ve said numerous times it was a result of a clear misunderstand on both sides, the moderator and myself. I’ve acknowledged that it was a misunderstanding, apologized for my part in it and more on pages ago. It is a dead issue if you have read the thread you would know this and I’ve said it over and over.

But I attacked the post not the poster which is the key rule of boards. Dumb was operative word like it or not in this occasion. Again we all have bad ideas; there is nothing rude about point that out. So going forward can I refer to other people's ideas as dumb and not face a warning? Where does the sliding scale of words begin and end.

It's simple, and I'll use an example from the Soccer forum this morning if you don't mind. I came across a post from someone saying that they wished injury on Gary Neville. He hopes Neville gets carried off next Saturday against Liverpool.

I'm a Liverpool fan but to wish injury on any player is out of order. So, I could had, like you, told the poster that "that was one of the dumbest things I ever heard". But I didn't phrase my response like that because I didn't want to antagonise the poster. I just started by saying "Sorry mate, I don't agree with that and here's why....."

That's pretty clear, is it not?

Kur4mA · 08-09-2008 4:38pm

I'll actually pay some moderators to infract this guy 10 times. PM me.

rovert · 08-09-2008 5:02pm

LZ5by5 wrote: »

It's simple, and I'll use an example from the Soccer forum this morning if you don't mind. I came across a post from someone saying they wished injury on Gary Neville and he said that he hopes Neville gets carried off next Saturday against Liverpool.

I'm a Liverpool fan but to wish injury on any player is out of order. So, I could had, like you, told the poster that "that was one of the dumbest things I ever heard". But I didn't phrase my response like that because I didn't want to antagonise the poster. I just started by saying "Sorry mate, I don't agree with that and here's why....."

That's pretty clear, is it not?

I admire your attempt at trying to give an example. It doesn’t really work Im afraid and I’m still unclear. What we are taking about is a business and someone advocating an extremely undesirable course action which should be apparent to absolutely anyone. The only way your example works in this situation is if you are suggested putting HHH and Undertaker together for the first time in years in a scramble match in attempt to sabotage the company. While you actually intent in ask about adding the Undertaker was to help the company, not hurt it.

Ok here is my example people at the time called Vince Russo dumb and worse for giving away a match on television for free were Flair lost his hair in a hair match instead putting it on PPV were it would have drawn a big buyrate and made a lot of money. Look how enormously successful that stipulation was for McMahon vs. Trump at Wrestlemania last year. If Vince Russo can be called dumb or worse for doing that for example (and there are plenty of examples in his case) why cant you for basically advocating something similar? In Vince Russo’s case the word was operative and merited, why isn’t operative and merit for you.

Doctor DooM · 08-09-2008 5:47pm

rovert wrote: »

But I attacked the post not the poster which is the key rule of boards. Dumb was operative word like it or not in this occasion. Again we all have bad ideas; there is nothing rude about point that out. So going forward can I refer to other people's ideas as dumb and not face a warning? Where does the sliding scale of words begin and end.

Id seriously ask you to read the thread again if this your view. Ive moved on from numerous things which indicates that yes I did ask a number of questions not just one, that I did listen to all of posters. Too bad they havent listened to me as I find myself repeating myself over and over again.

Funny, thats what I am doing right now.

It is not the rule about attacking the post not the poster you breached: You are engaging in activity which is damaging the forum by using inflammatory language.

The mod asked you to stop.

You can shift focus and change what you are arguing all you like but this isn't PW forum and I am not playing into your hands: So I will ask you this: Can you simply not go about calling things dumb?

Once again, I cannot speak for fozzy, but certainly no one in my forum would get away with calling others ideas dumb with out a warning, minimum. In fact, I must say, it would make me keep a very, very close eye on the poster.

I would once again reiterate I am fully aware you are under some amount of attack in the PW forum, and that's wrong too, but tbh if you cannot see this is in part because the way you behave sometimes is inflammatory, no one is going to be able to help you.

rovert · 08-09-2008 6:16pm

SDooM wrote: »

Funny, thats what I am doing right now.

It is not the rule about attacking the post not the poster you breached: You are engaging in activity which is damaging the forum by using inflammatory language.

The mod asked you to stop.

You can shift focus and change what you are arguing all you like but this isn't PW forum and I am not playing into your hands: So I will ask you this: Can you simply not go about calling things dumb?

Once again, I cannot speak for fozzy, but certainly no one in my forum would get away with calling others ideas dumb with out a warning, minimum. In fact, I must say, it would make me keep a very, very close eye on the poster.

I would once again reiterate I am fully aware you are under some amount of attack in the PW forum, and that's wrong too, but tbh if you cannot see this is in part because the way you behave sometimes is inflammatory, no one is going to be able to help you.

Sigh, how have I shifted focus when I’m saying the same things now that I was saying in the OP? I didn’t simply call things dumb, there was a qualification and I outlined why it was dumb in a reasoned manner. I simply don’t think calling someone’s idea dumb espescially when I offer an explaination why inflammatory to the extent it warrants a warning. Ill continue call ideas dumb if it is the operative word and will give an explaination why when I do so. When have I ever shifted focus and change what Im arguing in the PW forum btw, specfics please?

Insect Overlord · 08-09-2008 6:19pm

Dumb:

Lacking the power of speech. Used of animals and inanimate objects.
Often Offensive. Incapable of using speech; mute. Used of humans. See Usage Note at mute.
Temporarily speechless, as with shock or fear: I was dumb with disbelief.
Unwilling to speak; taciturn.
Not expressed or articulated in sounds or words.
Dumb

1. lacking the power to speak
2. lacking the power of human speech: the event was denounced as cruelty to dumb animals
3. temporarily unable to speak: I was struck dumb when I heard the news
4. done or performed without speech: I looked at her in dumb puzzlement

O.E.Dictionary definition :

1. a. Destitute of the faculty of speech.
b. Applied to the lower animals (and, by extension, to inanimate nature) as naturally incapable of articulate speech. Esp. in phrases dumb chum, dumb friend, applied to domesticated animals.

You used it incorrectly and in such a way that it may be seen as the spark to ignite the powder-keg. Just pick a new adjective in future and get the hell over it! :mad:

orestes · 08-09-2008 6:21pm

rovert wrote: »

I simply don’t think calling someone’s idea dumb espescially when I offer an explaination why inflammatory to the extent it warrants a warning.

The mod of the forum disagrees, and it's his call to make. End of story really.

copacetic · 08-09-2008 6:24pm

orestes wrote: »

The mod of the forum disagrees, and it's his call to make. End of story really.

agreed, I get the feeling the OP will keep rambling on until everyone changes their opinion to his or the thread is locked.

SidinNaas · 08-09-2008 6:34pm

Who died ?

Minto · 08-09-2008 6:37pm

rovert wrote: »

I do remember you and VR saying a lot of kind things about me whether it is my knowledge or posting style etc. At one stage and not early on in my posting on the Pro Wrestling forum you asked me on your podcast.

Yea, we did. You had copped yourself on for a bit and then you went back to your old ways and we both put you on ignore. Please don't ask me to quote the post, cos I've no idea where to look for it.

Warning for insulting behaviour

Comments