Banned from broadband

Infini

Uh, some things are best left untold,mate...

Boston

Infini wrote:

Uh, some things are best left untold,mate...

I'm wearing no underwear

CiaranC

Ive been banned also. What fun.

Amusingly, the individual who started calling people Morons is seemingly not banned, and continues to flame happily away.

Presumably because he is a mate of this ban-happy Moderator or something.

ecksor

Amusingly, I'm ignoring that until you provide a link to the offending posts.

CiaranC

That sounds like a job for a, you know, moderator.

What doesnt sound like the job of a moderator is banning everyone who takes up a particular side of opinion in a discussion, regardless of their conduct.

ecksor

CiaranC wrote:

That sounds like a job for a, you know, moderator.

The moderator isn't the one complaining, you are, therefore it's up to you to make your case.

CiaranC

I dont care enough to "make a case".

If such nonsense from moderators is acceptable behaviour, then I'll go and post somewhere with a less retarded usage policy.

Gosh

Moriarty wrote:

Yes, yes indeed.


fucking rofl

Anybody going to "moderate" on this ?


From this ...

Steve S wrote:

Funny!

To this ...

ecksor wrote:

Steve S banned from System category.

Banned for what ? Did I miss something ?


Here's another example I can't uderstand ...

13-Jan-2005 19:00

Moriarty wrote:

Can we update this, can we move that, can we pay for this, can you kill that.. demanding bunch aren't you.

I intended to do it months ago but never really seemed to get around to it. I'll probably start on it piece by piece over the next few days/weeks.

15-Jan-2005 16:20

Infini wrote:

Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed.....

15-Jan-2005 16:33

Moriarty wrote:

Dunno about thursday, but you're right today.

Infini banned for a week.

Moriarty - " My patience for humanity is dwindling. " Is this really a good signature for a Moderator ?

ecksor = "Today's word is ... quit"

Come on guys, it's about you moved on and somebody closed this thread !!

ecksor

Gosh wrote:

Anybody going to "moderate" on this ?

Hm?

Banned for what ? Did I miss something ?

You missed the post that got deleted.

ecksor = "Today's word is ... quit"

You have a problem with my signature?

Boston

If you can't see why steve was banned from system, then your a tool.

ecksor

CiaranC wrote:

I dont care enough to "make a case".

That's fine, I just wanted to be clear in case you felt you were making a case and wondering why I was ignoring it.

Gosh

ecksor wrote:

You missed the post that got deleted.

You have a problem with my signature?

When reading the thread it looks like "arbitrary" banning when a post is deleted without reference to it.

No - I don't have a problem with your signature ... but some people don't know when to ....

ecksor

There was at least one reference to the offending post on this thread when I banned him. I think there was two. I can still see at least one anyway.

Boston

3 references actually, hard to miss infact. infact he quoted the post by moriarty referencing it. Sound abit trollest to me, better ban him to be on the safe side.

Gosh

ecksor wrote:

There was at least one reference to the offending post on this thread when I banned him. I think there was two. I can still see at least one anyway.

I can see the reference - but if you remove an offending post then you should make sure it can't be quoted verbatim

Boston wrote:

If you can't see why steve was banned from system, then your a tool.

The "offending posts" were removed but continued to be quoted - what's the point of removing them and continuing to quote them - you can't have it both ways

Boston wrote:

well there's only bannage for it now. Go to work ecksor, ban him, ba him where it hurts.

Boston wrote:

3 references actually, hard to miss infact. infact he quoted the post by moriarty referencing it. Sound abit trollest to me, better ban him to be on the safe side.

2 acts of encitement in one thread ...

Think I'll stay out of this cat-fight ... enjoy yourselves ...

Infini

Gosh wrote:

Think I'll stay out of this cat-fight ... enjoy yourselves ...

When a legit argument becomes a back-alley bitch-slapping contest it's better to just run like hell mate.

ecksor

Aye, Boston is kinda my special pet, so there's some preferential treatment there. Sorry about that. I have banned him from this forum many times before though and I don't ban anyone else based on his comments.

Moriarty

Gosh, Steve S deleted his own post a few minutes after posting it.

Seemingly he chickened out.

Boston

ecksor wrote:

Aye, Boston is kinda my special pet, so there's some preferential treatment there. Sorry about that. I have banned him from this forum many times before though and I don't ban anyone else based on his comments.

It's funny that they think you do what I say. Now make me a cup of tea and a mustard and ham sandwich

Also Godh criticises you for not referencing the offending post when you banned Steve, but also criticises you for not removing all other reference to the post. Either way he chose to ignore the post.

sceptre

Gosh wrote:

Moriarty - " My patience for humanity is dwindling. " Is this really a good signature for a Moderator ?

You'd be surprised. There are a hell of a lot of good folks out there, only outnumbered by the people who can't read when it suits them. Pile of those out there.

Gosh

Boston wrote:

Also Godh criticises you for not referencing the offending post when you banned Steve, but also criticises you for not removing all other reference to the post. Either way he chose to ignore the post.

I didn't ignore the post but my point about removing an offensive post, quoting it back verbatim and then apparently banning on the basis of the response NOT the original post (which had been deleted) still stands.

Moriarty wrote:

Gosh, Steve S deleted his own post a few minutes after posting it.

Seemingly he chickened out.

If Steve deleted his post then he saw it was wrong and had the good sense to delete it - then it shouldn't have been used to ban him.

So my original question "Did I miss something?" has been answered - thank you

Boston - I'm not a tool just trying to understand what went on ...

ecksor

Gosh wrote:

If Steve deleted his post then he saw it was wrong and had the good sense to delete it - then it shouldn't have been used to ban him.

In some cases I might take that view, but the post didn't really read like it was a temporary loss of judgement to me. At any rate, it was obviously viewed by the intended party before being deleted and that may have been the intention.

Infini

ecksor wrote:

In some cases I might take that view, but the post didn't really read like it was a temporary loss of judgement to me. At any rate, it was obviously viewed by the intended party before being deleted and that may have been the intention.

Can you quote what it said or is it a personal jab?

Gosh

ecksor wrote:

In some cases I might take that view, but the post didn't really read like it was a temporary loss of judgement to me. At any rate, it was obviously viewed by the intended party before being deleted and that may have been the intention.

But it wasn't the intended party that banned him - did you ban him on the basis you saw it or you saw Moriarty's response?

echomadman

Gosh wrote:

But it wasn't the intended party that banned him - did you ban him on the basis you saw it or you saw Moriarty's response?

GIBBERISH, all gibberish.
this thread makes my brain hurt.
Gosh, he was banned (i presume) for personal insults towards another boards user. regardless of how ecksor saw it, why are you dragging this cluster**** of a thread even more off topic.

ecksor

I agree with echomadman, but for all it matters I did see the post. It's still in our database in fact.

infini, it has already been quoted.

Gosh

echomadman wrote:

regardless of how ecksor saw it, why are you dragging this cluster**** of a thread even more off topic.

This thread was way off topic (around post 17 I think) before I asked a SIMPLE question (post 39) and was told I was a TOOL (isn't that a personal insult?) - I read and re-read the thread to try and understand why Steve S was banned but something was missing (i.e. the deleted post).

It's gone off onto why Steve S was banned but only because I didn't get the answers to the original question until post 49.

I was ONLY seeking clarification so don't blame me for taking the thread off topic.

secret_squirrel

Gosh wrote:

I read and re-read the thread

You read and re-read it so well that you completely missed where the insult was quoted - more than once presumably.

Personally I think all the wailing and gnashing of teeth has been most amusing.....

Gosh

secret_squirrel wrote:

You read and re-read it so well that you completely missed where the insult was quoted - more than once presumably.

Like I said back in post 46 I saw the reference (3 quotes actually) when I read it but couldn't figure out where the offending post was. If it was deemed offensive by the intended recipient (and the response in post 28 doesn't make this 100% clear) then it should not have been quoted back for everyone to see - it should have been dealt with a PM ...

ecksor

Logically there was no insult, since you did understand the reason for the banning then you are not a tool.

Actually may be a different story, but Boston is such a good boy ...