Larxene Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Nathanael Darius Striker' timestamp='1352871442' post='6069044'] Eh, I still remember the days when people wanted to run me out of town. I agree that banning hated members is wrong as it doesn't give them a chance to improve. I admit that I took forever to learn my lesson, but I eventually did. Like others have said, people learn at a different pace. [/quote] I still remember the days when you were a dildo. You still are. But you were then, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanael D. Striker Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Larxene' timestamp='1353606200' post='6075621'] I still remember the days when you were a dildo. You still are. But you were then, too. [/quote] <3 too Larxene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Colonel Remo Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Larxene' timestamp='1353606200' post='6075621'] I still remember the days when you were a dildo. You still are. But you were then, too. [/quote] Hrm, I feel like this wording is a reference to something =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwarven King Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Nathanael Darius Striker' timestamp='1353549714' post='6075270'] I opened up to her. Guess it was just a waste. >__< [/quote] Everyone does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted November 22, 2012 Report Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Dwarven King' timestamp='1353616075' post='6075736'] Everyone does. [/quote] I understand your pain and am currently expressing sympathy. We should collaborate to eliminate that rascal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 This topic is silly and has gotten way off track. So then, for all the people still here I present the question: When is it necessary to ban a member? I mean, other then the obvious Spambotting/porn posting/russian letter stuff. is it ever even necessary at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanael D. Striker Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 If the person is a problem to the entire community and is stubborn to change their ways, they I think they should be banned cause they have been given plenty of chances and failed to change their ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Revan of the Sith Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 They should be banned when they break the rules, not by how they act unless it is against the rules to do so. And I am not saying that to cover my a**. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwarven King Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 [quote name='Hina~' timestamp='1353617495' post='6075752'] I understand your pain and am currently expressing sympathy. We should collaborate to eliminate that rascal. [/quote] Bad troll! *swats your nose with a newspaper* BAD! OT: Only ban them when they break the rules. It's why we have the flipping things in the first place! D:< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 [quote name='Dwarven King' timestamp='1353832732' post='6077368'] Bad troll! *swats your nose with a newspaper* BAD! OT: Only ban them when they break the rules. It's why we have the flipping things in the first place! D:< [/quote] Try not to make an assumption. I'll reiterate the question is if one should be banned for breaking norms, of which the definition is essentially a non-legislated standard. If you're going to ban somebody for breaking it, whether or not they're a moron or a troll, you'd best change the rules to cater to the problem to prevent repetition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 [quote name='Hina~' timestamp='1353872396' post='6077746'] Try not to make an assumption. I'll reiterate the question is if one should be banned for breaking norms, of which the definition is essentially a non-legislated standard. If you're going to ban somebody for breaking it, whether or not they're a moron or a troll, you'd best change the rules to cater to the problem to prevent repetition. [/quote] [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1353290134' post='6073073'] OT: Rule 0: Do not make the forum a crappier place every time you post, ect... [/quote] This is the pinnacle of common sense. If you don't understand this, you probably shouldn't be on any forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1353880740' post='6077880'] This is the pinnacle of common sense. If you don't understand this, you probably shouldn't be on any forum. [/quote] Then what makes the forum "crappier" eventually becomes what most people agree on. I can say you make the forum worse every time you say anything, but most people won't agree. It's such an arbitrary rule I'd ban everybody who disagreed with me had I the power because I believe their opposing opinions cause redundant conflict. It's also an incredibly lazy rule to whoever thought it up, and, whether or not it existed, people would still be confronted for making this place terrible. It still falls under a status quo if people are judged by the community, rather than a leader or oligarchy. It's absolutely obsolete and shouldn't even be applicable to the topic. The original post would still stand, seeing as it was about enforcing subjective standards to everybody. It's like when the government wasn't secular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 [quote name='Hina~' timestamp='1353881893' post='6077889'] Then what makes the forum "crappier" eventually becomes what most people agree on. [b]I can say you make the forum worse every time you say anything, but most people won't agree. It's such an arbitrary rule I'd ban everybody who disagreed with me had I the power because I believe their opposing opinions cause redundant conflict.[/b] It's also an incredibly lazy rule to whoever thought it up, and, whether or not it existed, people would still be confronted for making this place terrible. It still falls under a status quo if people are judged by the community, rather than a leader or oligarchy. It's absolutely obsolete and shouldn't even be applicable to the topic. The original post would still stand, seeing as it was about enforcing subjective standards to everybody. It's like when the government wasn't secular. [/quote] The bold is why we have a moderating [i]team[/i] of reasonable people who can keep their emotions out of such decisions, for the most part. This is also why we warn and contact people to change their posting habits should they not realize what they are doing wrong. There really is nothing lazy about it, as we try several methods to keep people from facing the hammer. I was not going off of the main topic, but the branch you presented. (ie. "...you'd best change the rules to cater to the problem to prevent repetition.") We don't need a written rule, because it should be something that should be understood. Even if it isn't, the staff make it so it is understood before severe action is taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1353883109' post='6077906'] The bold is why we have a moderating [i]team[/i] of reasonable people who can keep their emotions out of such decisions, for the most part. This is also why we warn and contact people to change their posting habits should they not realize what they are doing wrong. There really is nothing lazy about it, as we try several methods to keep people from facing the hammer. I was not going off of the main topic, but the branch you presented. (ie. "...you'd best change the rules to cater to the problem to prevent repetition.") We don't need a written rule, because it should be something that should be understood. Even if it isn't, the staff make it so it is understood before severe action is taken. [/quote] Which is why I mentioned having an oligarchy after. The moderators are an oligarchy, like a more corrupt Victorian Britain. Warning and contacting them has no relevance to what the rule itself is. Saying it "should" be understood against the possibility of needing a written rule and giving a common sense rule is almost like bigotry. A moderator has no place moderating what isn't part of the rules and then enforcing a very vague common sense rule. Imagine a country with a "common sense" rule. And who says the moderators are clear and logical thinkers? The church thought they were right and would punish those who weren't like-minded or though too differently while they were in power, enforcing discrimination, and most thought they were clear and logical, yet discrimination is spat upon today. It's inherently nothing different whatsoever besides the case and such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Colonel Remo Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 What if we allowed warn points to be made public with your history on the line? Obviously they would start everyone's logs from scratch if they did, but do you think it would be as effective at curbing small offenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.