Banned from Palentolgy forum for no reaons.

mysterious

Hi


Can someone please explain to me why some mods tend to think they can ban people because they disagree with their posts.


I posted facts, evidence and pictures to the thread, It is as supported as any other topic in paleontology. There is absaloutley no justification to ban me.

sceptre

Mods can't ban people merely because they disagree with their posts. There's always another reason or should be.

What rationale were you given for your ban?

Please bear in mind that I'm aware of the content of your Palaeontology thread as I just took a look at it.

mysterious

sceptre wrote: »

Mods can't ban people merely because they disagree with their posts. There's always another reason or should be.

What rationale were you given for your ban?

Please bear in mind that I'm aware of the content of your Palaeontology thread as I just took a look at it.

Well i posted alot of evidence

Galvasean has a mental block about reality. in other words anything outside of his studies doesn't hold any context.


The banning was not warrented. I think this largly in appropriate given the amount of evidence I posted.

sceptre

What rationale were you given for your ban?

New additional question: Have you contacted the moderator about the ban to discuss it?

mysterious

Here,


Hi mysterious,

You have been banned from Palaeontology for the following duration:

7 Day(s)

for the following reason:

Soapboxing

Providing your ban is not permanent, it will be lifted automatically after 7 Day(s). You will get an automatic message informing you that the ban is lifted. If you do not receive this message after the alloted time, please PM a moderator to clarify.
Also, please be aware that an abusive response to this automated message may result in an extension of your ban, or in extreme cases, being banned from the entire site.

Thanks,

Forum Moderator.



I feel it's way off the mark Sceptre. I can't view the thread, But other people were interested in it. Obviously one person I think pulled Galvasean up for warning me in the first place (on the basis of disagreeing with my posts)

The Sweeper

The only thing I would change about your ban is substitute "trolling" for "soapboxing".

You are free to post your thougts and opinions.

However, your evidence is weak, yet when the points you posit are refuted you become patronising and ridiculous, accusing other posters of being close-minded and ignorant. So you can refute their accepted norms, but if they question your alternative you piss all over it? How does that work, exactly?

You could also do with some serious study on how to put across a position that is worthy of consideration rather than derision, including the nature of empirical evidence, and why regurgitating other people's poorly forumlated conspiracy theories, comprised of doctored photographs and unsupported statistics, does not make for a cogent argument.

Additionally, despite being told not to do this repeatedly on other forums, you went against a mod's instructions on-thread, and if nothing else you could have been banned for that. The same troublemaking posters who pop up again and again seem to have one major hurdle in their understanding of how these forums work. You will not be banned for disagreeing with a mod's argument. You will be banned for going against a moderation instruction, especially when that instruction has been given to you because you a dragging a thread off-topic or generally trolling.

mysterious

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

The only thing I would change about your ban is substitute "trolling" for "soapboxing".

It wasn't soap boxing. I don't feel such a ban is warranted.

You are free to post your thougts and opinions.

In this case I wasn't.

However, your evidence is weak, yet when the points you posit are refuted you become patronising and ridiculous, accusing other posters of being close-minded and ignorant. So you can refute their accepted norms, but if they question your alternative you piss all over it? How does that work, exactly?

How was my evidence weak. Please show me this is the case here. It is not debunked. I haven't been given any chance to continue posting.


I admit to be a litte off guard, but we do have a mod who is unwilling to accept other people's point of view. He doesn't respect that.


[/quote]
Additionally, despite being told not to do this repeatedly on other forums, you went against a mod's instructions on-thread, and if nothing else you could have been banned for that. The same troublemaking posters who pop up again and again seem to have one major hurdle in their understanding of how these forums work. You will not be banned for disagreeing with a mod's argument. You will be banned for going against a moderation instruction, especially when that instruction has been given to you because you a dragging a thread off-topic or generally trolling.[/quote]

I didnt go against him. He banned me.
I really don't understand helpdesk. Whi is it that boards support apathy, ignorance and chidishness.

He banned me for apathy.

Galvasean

If I may argue my case in chronological order;

Troodon thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055609125&highlight=troodon
Mysterious' first thread in the Palaeontology Forum (titled 'Troodon') started with an original post asking what appeared to be genuine and interesting questions related to the dinosaur of the same name (Troodon). It is not uncommon for people to come to this forum to ask questions relating to the field of palaeontology (in fact it is actively encouraged). As with any similar thread I answered the questions in the OP to the best of my abilities. No questions were left unanswered.

Mysterious' reply to me was twofold. One part 'debating' the points I made by ignoring and misrepresenting what I said and drawing his own conclusions. For example he mentioned that the primates of 4 million years ago were bigger than teh dinosaur Troodon when it the topic at hand was the creatures that lived 65 million years ago - a moot point serving only to mislead. The other aspect of his reply was referencing the lizard people conspiracy theory (something which is very much outside the realms of palaeontology, the study of prehistoric life).

He then went on to converse with Darjeeling and Grimes (who is also a Palaeontology Forum moderator) in a similar fashion. By post # 14:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=60976653&postcount=14

Grimes posted an on thread warning, stating that the thread was becoming too Conspiracy Theories orientated and asked for Mysterious to back up his claims.
Mysterious continued to 'debate' Darjeeling in the same manner as before so I left an on thread warning (post 17):
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=60978114&postcount=17
stating that all arguments should be based within the realms of science and that soapboxing is not allowed (as per the forum charter). I also said that any continued breaking of these rules would result in the thread being locked and the possibility of further punishment,

Mysterious' next post (in response to Darjeeling) was more of the same. this post however contained references to aliens tampering with human DNA. Now, I must admit that I allowed curiosity to get the better of me in this instance so I allowed the thread to go on a bit longer as I was curious as to what he was referring to.
I gave Mysteious one day (as outlined in post #21) to provide evidence for his claims. None came so I locked the thread.

'Dinosaurs Answer To Wolverine' thread:
Mysterious later showed up in the therizinosaur thread, making a referense to 'classified' dinosaurs. I left an on thread warning in post #5:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61178709&postcount=5
stating that I would not stand for him attempting to derail the thread.

Human Evolution thread:
Mysterious' next appearance in the Palaeontology forum was the 'Human Evolution' thread, which, much like the 'Troodon' thread began with him asking seemingly genuine questions which were answered by both myself and GradMed. In addition to answers to Mysterious' questions I left an on thread warning stating that if this thread went the way of the 'Troodon' thread I would be less lenient when handing out punishment. Here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61274536&postcount=3

Mysterious' next post was about 'reptilian rulers' and conformity so I issued an official warning (yellow card) for what I consider spamming the forum.
Mysterious continued posting bizarre CT type things and claimed no one answered his question on apes - which I actually did and GradMed pointed out.
At this point the thread had gone far beyond the remits of palaeontology so I closed it, issuing a one week ban for Mysterious and an on thread warning for two other posters. Details can be seen in post #18:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61298552&postcount=18

Profile Messages
One thing I did not realise about Mysterious is that he was using his user profile visitor messages section to have digs at me. After recieving his (yellow card) warning he copied and pasted the automated message to his profile, followed by a message calling me ignorant and apathetic.
This was reported by another boards user and Mysterious recieved a red card infraction for it.
I was not alerted to this until after Mysterious was banned from the Palaeontology Forum. Had I have known this his ban would have been more severe.

In fact, now that I have actually looked back at all the warnings we (in the Palaeontology Forum) have given to Mysterious, not to mention the amount of infractions/bannings he has accumulated across boards.ie, and his complete inability to admit fault for his own actions, I feel he has gotten off quite lightly.
Suffice to say I will not give him the benefit of the doubt in any future situations like this.

mysterious

Galvasean wrote: »

If I may argue my case in chronological order;

Troodon thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055609125&highlight=troodon
Mysterious' first thread in the Palaeontology Forum (titled 'Troodon') started with an original post asking what appeared to be genuine and interesting questions related to the dinosaur of the same name (Troodon). It is not uncommon for people to come to this forum to ask questions relating to the field of palaeontology (in fact it is actively encouraged). As with any similar thread I answered the questions in the OP to the best of my abilities. No questions were left unanswered.

That was a thread, yes? Point being?
Deffering issue here? dancing around the bush? Deflecting the actuall issue?


You don't encourage any topic, other than the bull**** you were taught. Anything outside your realm of palentology, results in this


"A ban"
"Don't go there now"

etc.

Mysterious' reply to me was twofold. One part 'debating' the points I made by ignoring and misrepresenting what I said and drawing his own conclusions. For example he mentioned that the primates of 4 million years ago were bigger than teh dinosaur Troodon when it the topic at hand was the creatures that lived 65 million years ago - a moot point serving only to mislead. The other aspect of his reply was referencing the lizard people conspiracy theory (something which is very much outside the realms of palaeontology, the study of prehistoric life). [/quiote]

I enbolded this,

Can you provide Proof?

Mysterious' next post (in response to Darjeeling) was more of the same. this post however contained references to aliens tampering with human DNA. Now, I must admit that I allowed curiosity to get the better of me in this instance so I allowed the thread to go on a bit longer as I was curious as to what he was referring to.
I gave Mysteious one day (as outlined in post #21) to provide evidence for his claims. None came so I locked the thread.

I allowed you to lock the thread.

After I read your email...................................

If someone provided you proof you put still live in delusion of this bull**** you preach about apes.

I'm sorry but this ****e has got to stop. Conforming to a load of crap and Darwins theory is not even fact for christ sake. You just simply believe it, just like i believe in my own theory.

Where as I use logic, intuition, observation and research to come to my conclusion. You on the otherhand retain anything you have been taught.

Am I right?

Human Evolution thread:
Mysterious' next appearance in the Palaeontology forum was the 'Human Evolution' thread, which, much like the 'Troodon' thread began with him asking seemingly genuine questions which were answered by both myself and GradMed. In addition to answers to Mysterious' questions I left an on thread warning stating that if this thread went the way of the 'Troodon' thread I would be less lenient when handing out punishment. Here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61274536&postcount=3

Mysterious' next post was about 'reptilian rulers' and conformity so I issued an official warning (yellow card) for what I consider spamming the forum.
Mysterious continued posting bizarre CT type things and claimed no one answered his question on apes - which I actually did and GradMed pointed out.
At this point the thread had gone far beyond the remits of palaeontology so I closed it, issuing a one week ban for Mysterious and an on thread warning for two other posters. Details can be seen in post #18:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61298552&postcount=18

I never took this thread off topic, (despite your warnings) What you consider spamming in your opinion ( is not considered spamming in a objectieve sense)

It can mean any number of things like you dissagreeing with me or you been ignorant (let me guess)

Or you denying reality or you just not comfortable or you simply not been open to anyone else's opinion.

Put the bull**** aside. No need to be so elaborative about the banning. Everony knows me well enough at this stage, you don't need to turn it into something bigger than it is. You simply dissagreed with my evidence and banned me.

Profile Messages
One thing I did not realise about Mysterious is that he was using his user profile visitor messages section to have digs at me. After recieving his (yellow card) warning he copied and pasted the automated message to his profile, followed by a message calling me ignorant and apathetic.
This was reported by another boards user and Mysterious recieved a red card infraction for it.
I was not alerted to this until after Mysterious was banned from the Palaeontology Forum. Had I have known this his ban would have been more severe.

In fact, now that I have actually looked back at all the warnings we (in the Palaeontology Forum) have given to Mysterious, not to mention the amount of infractions/bannings he has accumulated across boards.ie, and his complete inability to admit fault for his own actions, I feel he has gotten off quite lightly.
Suffice to say I will not give him the benefit of the doubt in any future situations like this.

I didnt use my profile user site to gain digs at you. Nobody is out to get you Galvasean. I posted my message after you banned me

Don't be trumping I'm a victim card.

I view your behaviour is as severe.

seamus

mysterious wrote: »

I enbolded this,

Can you provide Proof?

He doesn't have to. No evidence for your assertion exists. Therefore until you can provide proof, Galvasean's assertion that said apes did not exist is the correct one. You cannot prove that something did not exist except to show that it was not possible for it to exist.

If someone provided you proof you put still live in delusion of this bull**** you preach about apes.

I'm sorry but this ****e has got to stop. Conforming to a load of crap and Darwins theory is not even fact for christ sake. You just simply believe it, just like i believe in my own theory.

Where as I use logic, intuition, observation and research to come to my conclusion. You on the otherhand retain anything you have been taught.

And this is precisely why he has banned you and why you've been sanctioned by so many other forums. As MAJD points out, you simply dismiss everyone else's point of view as "brainwashing" or "retained knowledge", yet when they dismiss your point of view using hard facts, you refuse to relent and continue to posit the same "facts" while at the same time mocking and attacking other posters for their views. Despite the fact that they have evidence and you have none.

It's offensive. Your existence is disruptive because your attitude belittles the actual, practical, empirical work that the likes of Galvasean have done in the course of their study and in their daily lives. Your arrogance that everyone else is simply believing what they are told is offensive because a lot of the people you're talking to have gone out and investigated this information for themselves and found it to widely conform to what is written in books. You on the other hand wade in with wild stories which you haven't verified for yourself (because you can't) and which don't match up with the actual, physical evidence that these people have worked with and do work with on a day-to-day basis.

That's what's offensive and disruptive about you, and disruptive influences receive sanctions on boards.

By the way, I'm not going to debate your "theories" here. They're not up for debate. The above line is the issue here and nothing else.

Galvasean

mysterious wrote: »

You don't encourage any topic, other than the bull**** you were taught. Anything outside your realm of palentology, results in this


"A ban"
"Don't go there now"

etc.

Of course it does. It's the Palaeontology forum, which is for matters of palaeontology. There are other forums to discuss conspiracy theories, aliens, spirituality etc.

mysterious wrote:

I allowed you to lock the thread.

Did you now? The only people I would consult about locking a thread are the other Palaeontology Mods (and perhaps in extreme cases the forum Admins. However no such case has happened thus far).
To put it simply, I do not require your permission to lock a thread.

mysterious wrote:

I'm sorry but this ****e has got to stop. Conforming to a load of crap and Darwins theory is not even fact for christ sake. You just simply believe it, just like i believe in my own theory.[/quoute]

You don't seem to understand whata theory actually is. Someone explained to you what one is in the 'Human Evolution' thread.
Your 'theory' is actually more of a hypothesis.

mysterious wrote:

Where as I use logic, intuition, observation and research to come to my conclusion. You on the otherhand retain anything you have been taught.

Am I right?

You are not. Especially considering you PM'd me stating that my reliance on logic was holding me back.

mysterious wrote:

Put the bull**** aside. No need to be so elaborative about the banning.

Actually there is. You posted your own version of events (which left out several important details. I find it quite telling that you left out the bits where you were in the wrong.) in an attempt to villify me. It is only fair that am allowed to show my side of the story (not to mention the full story).

mysterious wrote:

Everony knows me well enough at this stage, you don't need to turn it into something bigger than it is

It seems they do. You have a reputation as a trouble maker across boards.ie and your behaviour in the Palaeontology Forum and this Help Desk thread has done nothing but confirm it.

mysterious wrote:

I didnt use my profile user site to gain digs at you.

Really? Publicly calling someone ignorant behind their back isn't a dig?

mysterious wrote:

Nobody is out to get you Galvasean.

mysterious wrote:

Don't be trumping I'm a victim card.

I find these quotes very ironic. You constantly cause trouble, refuse to admit fault and blame everyone but yourself for what has happened. You appear to be the one with the persecution complex.
Have you ever considered that the reason why you get no support every time you start a Help Desk thread is because you were clearly in the wrong?

mysterious

seamus wrote: »

He doesn't have to. No evidence for your assertion exists. Therefore until you can provide proof, Galvasean's assertion that said apes did not exist is the correct one. You cannot prove that something did not exist except to show that it was not possible for it to exist.

I don't have to lol......

He made the claim, He needs to back that statement he made of me.
I embolden his statement. Otherwise he is making up assumptions.

And this is precisely why he has banned you and why you've been sanctioned by so many other forums. As MAJD points out, you simply dismiss everyone else's point of view as "brainwashing" or "retained knowledge", yet when they dismiss your point of view using hard facts, you refuse to relent and continue to posit the same "facts" while at the same time mocking and attacking other posters for their views. Despite the fact that they have evidence and you have none.

The reason I was banned, is because he dissagreeed with me.

He didn't like my views, so I got that ban. Didn't get any opportunity to post more FACTS.

It's offensive. Your existence is disruptive because your attitude belittles the actual, practical, empirical work that the likes of Galvasean have done in the course of their study and in their daily lives. Your arrogance that everyone else is simply believing what they are told is offensive because a lot of the people you're talking to have gone out and investigated this information for themselves and found it to widely conform to what is written in books. You on the other hand wade in with wild stories which you haven't verified for yourself (because you can't) and which don't match up with the actual, physical evidence that these people have worked with and do work with on a day-to-day basis.

So your actually saying what Galvasean read is proof and what I did was not. Do you not see how silly that is. I've studed all my life on various topics. Whether you think you know it all or not, isn't the key, the key is questioning and looking for the answers yourself. This is the way you learn. Not read darwins theory books and "go ah thats right" Lets tell everyone"

This pattern of society is now changing thank god. And yes Everything Galvasean has taught will be the laughing stock in a few years. I time will prove my position I can be confident of that.

I actually use all my skills to research. You can read all the books in the world and still not have a clue about anything. Why because you believed simply everything you ever read. Questioning and observation is very important.

Arrogance was shown when Galvasean banned me off the forum. I have gone out and investigated this, I'm shocked that you cannot see both sides here?

That's what's offensive and disruptive about you, and disruptive influences receive sanctions on boards.

This comment was out of line and something I do not respect at all.

By the way, I'm not going to debate your "theories" here. They're not up for debate. The above line is the issue here and nothing else.[/quote]

Well Galvasean brought up all other topics in order to defer the unreasonable banning on the human evolution.

There was no justification for the banning. I was not disruptive on the thread. I posted my questions, evidence, and facts. The next day I got banned. If other posters can see this, I fail to see you refuse to see it

mysterious

Galvasean wrote: »

Of course it does. It's the Palaeontology forum, which is for matters of palaeontology. There are other forums to discuss conspiracy theories, aliens, spirituality etc.

There was no conspiracy theory or anything of that nature.

It was human evolution

Did you now? The only people I would consult about locking a thread are the other Palaeontology Mods (and perhaps in extreme cases the forum Admins. However no such case has happened thus far).
To put it simply, I do not require your permission to lock a thread.

Because most people follow the same thing:D (despite everything you read is still based on a theory too0

You don't seem to understand whata theory actually is. Someone explained to you what one is in the 'Human Evolution' thread.
Your 'theory' is actually more of a hypothesis.

No I posted pictures and evidence of bones and excavations. You simply put your beliefs over it, because you believe in the same nonsense since you learnt to speak. "I must conform and believe what I was told and taught" It wasn't a hypothesis, there you go again with your personal dominance. That is ignorance. I don't have to call you ignorant. You simply are woefully behaving this way.

You are not. Especially considering you PM'd me stating that my reliance on logic was holding me back.

No you said logic was the only answer. I didnt reply. And when you said you have till tomorrow to post. I felt the response and attitude was absurd. So I left the thread to be locked. There was no point in debating topics, when you have been drilled the same nonsense about these topics over and over to the point you will not accept anything else as evidence.

Actually there is. You posted your own version of events (which left out several important details. I find it quite telling that you left out the bits where you were in the wrong.) in an attempt to villify me. It is only fair that am allowed to show my side of the story (not to mention the full story).

You have no proof of anything, you didnt' do anything but provide a ban. Again no one is out to villify you or take you down.

It seems they do. You have a reputation as a trouble maker across boards.ie and your behaviour in the Palaeontology Forum and this Help Desk thread has done nothing but confirm it.

My reputation is pretty good, since one of the only few who is willing to speak out and speak the truth.:)

Really? Publicly calling someone ignorant behind their back isn't a dig?

No I pointed the behaviour, and yes it was true. You bully me with a ban, then I am clearly not going sit back and let you get away with it.

I find these quotes very ironic. You constantly cause trouble, refuse to admit fault and blame everyone but yourself for what has happened. You appear to be the one with the persecution complex.
Have you ever considered that the reason why you get no support every time you start a Help Desk thread is because you were clearly in the wrong?

Well remember before you start pointing fingers,

Playing the victim card and now rolling it all back. You were wrong simple as that. You put your bigotry over somone.

Galvasean

Well Mysterious has brought the topic full circle and here we are back at phase 1.
I've made my case. Mysterious has made his.
I don't think I need to post in this thread anymore. If a moderator (of the Help Desk) needs me to clarify anything would they please send me a PM and I will gladly do so.

The Sweeper

Galvasean, your ban stands.

mysterious

Why does this ban stand, its not acceptable.