Permanent After Hours ban for posting video of a Tent!

Ted!

Last week, while hanging out in After Hours - noticed a thread on the weirdest things you've seen online. Straight away I thought about the guy who built tent in the shape of a women's body!

YouTube Video Code: vD2ebkQ9ncQ

I posted it, expecting to get well thanked and began to envisage all the plaudits I would receive how I would soon be seen as one of the gang and where the regulars would be glad I came and they'd always know my name. You wanna be where you can see, troubles are all the .. anyway, Humanji banned me, permanently!

Something needs to be done here, the guy is out of control and what's more, Silverfish sitebanned me for week too and I've had to spend the last seven days in Boards.ie Prison talking to some guy called Gordon and I have no idea if he parts his hair down the middle or not, but I got so bored, I began to imagine that I was chatting to Flash Gordon!

This is not good ..

Why was I permanently banned from AH? Why was I even banned at all? Is there not system of infractions for such minor instances, where things are posted that are deemed to be NSFW and "uncivil"? Particularly when they're a first offense?

As I said to Flash in Prison: it's just a tent that looks like a naked body and where a guy then crawls out of it. Nobody is doing anything sexual to the tent and I'm sure if some eleven year old seen it posted, they would laugh - would be educational for them if anything, as the guy had enough forethought to make it a bald tent - although maybe it would have been better with hair, as if there was a storm the wind would .. the point is, that it was just a giant naked woman tent and was not in the least bit pornographic.

Much of the conversations in AH (and even thread titles) are way more NSFW than that tent. The day I posted there was another thread there where they were talking about kids getting beheaded by the Taliban and another also on which sex acts were natural or not. Graphic discussions about nasty videos that can be found online containing four women, three men, two cups and a goat, I would feel would be far more mind warping for an eleven year old, than a naked tent would.

Let's hear the case of the prosecution.

dr.bollocko

Hello,

While i want to help you out we've immediately got a problem here.

The problem is your assertion that you posted a picture of a tent.
If you posted a picture of a tent you would not be banned.

Would you like to explain to your employer, if he noticed this image, that it was just a picture of a tent?

How do you think that would go down?

So let's get rid of that mentality right away.

There is a reason you were sitebanned. So, rather than playing the victim which will get us nowhere I'd accept that you did wrong, you've been let back and now want to regain access to after hours.

44 posts in, already one siteban and a permanent AH ban?

We're not the ones with the problem here.

So. Rather than any kind of assertion that this is an over-reaction the best course of action to take at this point is to PM the mod who banned you to query it with them.

That is step one here.

A little advice. If you want to have any chance of this being heard then I would expect that PM to include an apology and an indication that you understood why you were banned and will not do this again.

So seeing as how that is a radical shift from what you posted above, I'd suggest you go ahead, think about it for a while, see it from our point of view and try and get in touch with the mod first.

Again, the line of reasoning you just used above will get you nowhere. If you can't accept what you did crossed a line then don't bother continuing because we will see absolutely no reason to consider lifting the ban.

Ted!

dr.bollocko wrote: »

The problem is your assertion that you posted a picture of a tent.

A video.

Would you like to explain to your employer, if he noticed this image, that it was just a picture of a tent?

I am my employer, but as I pointed out - I see the video being no more adult in nature than a lot of other content of that forum that is deemed acceptable, for example recent thread titles such as:

WHAT CONSTITUTES NATURAL SEX
17 CIVILIANS BEHEADED AT AFGHAN MIXED SEX PARTY
SEX TOYS
SEX WITH CIRCUMCISED GUYS?
WIFE FOUND HER HUBBY HAVING SEX WITH DOG!

How do you think that would go down?

How would an employee explain reading any of the above content to a boss? Think I'd rather explain the tent!

So let's get rid of that mentality right away.

The mentality of what I am saying is fine, you're just not taking the point.

There is a reason you were sitebanned. So, rather than playing the victim which will get us nowhere I'd accept that you did wrong, you've been let back and now want to regain access to after hours.

44 posts in, already one siteban and a permanent AH ban?

We're not the ones with the problem here.

Ha! You have to be joking.

You say I have sitebaned and a permanent ban already, as if they are separate, in an obvious attempt at making it look like I have a litany of offenses to my name - I don't.

The problem is me and not you? How original. If my appeal is just going to be you throwing the usual cliches around then I doubt we will get anywhere.

So. Rather than any kind of assertion that this is an over-reaction the best course of action to take at this point is to PM the mod who banned you to query it with them.

It is an overreaction and a very obvious one.

That is step one here.

Gordon told me to appeal the ban here but will PM the mod now also if that is what is requested.

A little advice. If you want to have any chance of this being heard then I would expect that PM to include an apology and an indication that you understood why you were banned and will not do this again.

I'm sorry, but I think you have missed why I am appealing the ban: I believe it to be over the top and unwarranted. Why would I apologise and I say I understood something which I have made clear that I most certainly do not?

So seeing as how that is a radical shift from what you posted above, I'd suggest you go ahead, think about it for a while, see it from our point of view and try and get in touch with the mod first.

I have no problem PMing the mod in question, but this is not a one way street here, or at least it shouldn't be. I have acknowledged your POV as moderators already, in the prison forum and will do so again here, but I in return I would like a little taking on board of my POV also, so far it has not even been addressed, let alone taking on board.

Again, the line of reasoning you just used above will get you nowhere. If you can't accept what you did crossed a line then don't bother continuing because we will see absolutely no reason to consider lifting the ban.

As I said to Gordon, I concede that perhaps I should included NSFW tags (maybe) but as that would have done zero for those merely seeing the post, I'm not sure what it would have achieved, as what has been seen, can't be unseen. I would even stretch to conceding that perhaps it would have been better to link to the video with a warning included, but what I will never concede is that the video is any more adult in nature than quite a lot of the regular content of After Hours, as it simply is not.

My kid's primary school has life sized anatomy mannequins for heaven sake and all I posted was a video of what to all intents and purposes was a giant version of just that and received a siteban (and a PERMANENT After Hours ban) for it, ludicrous.

An infraction for a first offense would be somewhat understandable, followed by a PM outlining why it was deemed necessary but when that particular forum's quite often adult nature discussions are taking into account, a siteban and a permanent forum ban for posting what equates to a giant naked mannequin, is ott and quite clearly so!

Will PM the mod now.

Ted!

PM'd the mod and his reply was:

humanji wrote:

What you posted was against the forum and site rules.

I've no idea why the admins didn't permanently site ban you.

The After Hours ban stays.

If in a few months time you've behaved yourself, we might reconsider the length of the ban.

The reply I received was pretty much what I expected considering their judgement in issuing the permanent ban in the first place.

The mod seems to think giant unclothed mannequins are: "against the forum and site rules" and that the first time a user is in breach of them, they deserve to be "permanently sitebanned". I take they never use the infraction system then, what with an attitude like that.

Look folks, my reasoning for declaring this permanent AH ban to be ludicrous is there for all to see. I have tried to dispute and appeal this in somewhat good natured spirit but tbh, my patience is wearing thin.

The video was no more adult content that much of what is posted in AH daily but I will concede that a link would have been better with NSFW tags but as the thread was about weird stuff you have seen online and users were discussing two women, one cup graphically, this video seemed quite tame in comparison. It was a harmless video of a giant tent in the shape of a female body, that a man then proceeds to crawl from. YouTube don't even list it as adult content, yet Boards.ie sitebans users that post it.

I'd like the ban removed as soon as possible. One week's site ban I is ott enough for posting a video deemed to be nsfw.

dr.bollocko

Well I agree with the mod and I agree with Gordon's assessment.

Furthermore I will point you to my first post above which you completely ignored and suggest that to be honest, given your persistent indication that you did no wrong and refusal to acknowledge the problem, I'm going to go ahead and keep the ban permanent.

Until you realise that what you did is demonstrably worse than listing topics or discussing them, then I'm not really happy to have you return to after hours.

If you wish for an admin to review at this point please say so.

Ted!

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Well I agree with the mod and I agree with Gordon's assessment.

No surprise there.

Furthermore I will point you to my first post above which you completely ignored and suggest that to be honest, given your persistent indication that you did no wrong and refusal to acknowledge the problem, I'm going to go ahead and keep the ban permanent..

"Completely ignored" your post??

I quoted both your posts in my replies and addressed all your points. You quoted me in NEITHER of yours and yet you say I ignored your posts?!

Until you realise that what you did is demonstrably worse than listing topics or discussing them, then I'm not really happy to have you return to after hours.

If it was so demonstrably worse, then why haven't you demonstrated it? Why are you avoiding saying what I am guilty of, which is posting a video of a giant tent shaped like a female that is no more explicit than an antimony mannequin one would find in schools?? I notice you keep skirting around mentioning it - I don't blame you though, as it's ludicrous to permanently ban someone for posting that video, ludicrous.

I respect that moderators have a job to do but just don't feel it was worthy of a ban, let alone a permanent one. It is extremely excessive to permanently ban someone for posting a video of that nature and as I have said, I have no problem conceding that perhaps a link to the video might have been more in-line with the forum's stance on adult content, as someone may have *mistakenly* felt that is in fact what it was, when it wasn't but I feel an infraction would be more appropriate for such an indiscretion and especially so as it was a first offense. It's a giant doll for heavens sake!!

You act as if the quite often adult discussions in After Hours have no relevance here, but they do. On a forum where people are allowed to graphically discuss a man having sex with dogs, I am been permanently banned for posting a giant naked mannequin tent - how you can't see the nonsense in that, is worrying. Discussions too can be just as adult in nature as images and videos, whether you accept that or not. Quite often in that forum, they are in fact far more adult in nature than a video of a man climbing from a naked doll could ever be.

I think most parents would rather their eleven year old came downstairs and after being online, talking about a giant naked tent, than came down asking them why men sometimes have sex with dogs. Reason being, one is far more adult in nature than the other. They are the facts here, and quite obvious ones.

If you wish for an admin to review at this point please say so.

Well, it was a member of admin that sitebanned me, so not sure if it is really worthwhile asking for them to review this, but sure, why not - would certainly appreciate an objective view here.

dr.bollocko

Could I request an admin review on this please.

Asiaprod

Well you can hardly expect to hear a subjective view.

From your prison thread an Admin told you:
"I agree with the ban, its a shame you haven't learned from this."

I can only say the same applies here, you haven't learned from the above;Its not about what you think should be acceptable here, Its about what we think is acceptable here.

In your favor is the fact that you are new to Boards; Don't impart any hidden, meaning or nuance into this, there is none. You need to learn how Boards operates. The ban stays. I recommend you read the Charters of each Forum you intend to engage in and enjoy the site.

I'm closing this thread, its done.