My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-03-2014, 07:28 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
(17-03-2014 07:18 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(17-03-2014 06:31 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I dunno, I'd say deliberately and admittedly being a total dick rather counts as intent to cause disruption and/or discord. So there's that.

Intentionality is determined by the motivation behind the action not the effects of it.

You intended to flame moms, you intended to be a dick - why you decided to do these things is irrelevant.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
17-03-2014, 07:31 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
(17-03-2014 04:49 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  You acted up.

You got your peepee slapped.

[Image: Jake_move_on.gif]

[Image: h886E1CE2]

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
17-03-2014, 07:37 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
(17-03-2014 04:32 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  As you can clearly see from that exchange, never was an admission made that I had intended to cause a forum disruption or discord. My intention was to test if the moderators would interpret the "rules" consistently. KC should modify his ban log and stop pretending he is capable of reading minds.

Really? Here's the rule:

5) Maliciously Disrupting the Forum is Prohibited
Anyone who comes here with the sole intent of causing chaos and conflict is not welcome. Being intentionally overly disruptive is also not acceptable. In the event that it is felt by the forum Administration that a person is causing excessive issues then they will be officially warned. Failure to heed the warning may lead to temporary bans leading up to a permanent ban if the offending behaviour is not ceased. Whacking their pee-pee is considered a last resort and only for the most serious situations. Anyone who is felt to be trying to manipulate this rule to get another member banned by causing controversy about them risks falling foul of this rule themselves and having their own pee-pee whacked.

Big Grin

“I suppose our capacity for self-delusion is boundless."
― John Steinbeck, Travels with Charley: In Search of America
“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's." - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Full Circle's post
17-03-2014, 07:40 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
(17-03-2014 07:26 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(17-03-2014 07:23 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Your stated motivation was "be a dick to see what happens".

...

I'd say that rather counts as deliberate disruption and/or discord.

So there's still that.

That is exactly why he was suspended.

So apparently EK's actions are okay because he was a dick because he is a dick?....and my actions are not okay because my being a dick was deliberate?

Whether or not my actions were deliberate is besides the larger point. Causing disruption and/or discord by flaming should not be permitted.

Vosur, Anjele, Hanoff.....have you learned nothing in my absence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2014, 07:43 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
(17-03-2014 07:37 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(17-03-2014 04:32 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  As you can clearly see from that exchange, never was an admission made that I had intended to cause a forum disruption or discord. My intention was to test if the moderators would interpret the "rules" consistently. KC should modify his ban log and stop pretending he is capable of reading minds.

Really? Here's the rule:

5) Maliciously Disrupting the Forum is Prohibited
Anyone who comes here with the sole intent of causing chaos and conflict is not welcome. Being intentionally overly disruptive is also not acceptable. In the event that it is felt by the forum Administration that a person is causing excessive issues then they will be officially warned. Failure to heed the warning may lead to temporary bans leading up to a permanent ban if the offending behaviour is not ceased. Whacking their pee-pee is considered a last resort and only for the most serious situations. Anyone who is felt to be trying to manipulate this rule to get another member banned by causing controversy about them risks falling foul of this rule themselves and having their own pee-pee whacked.

Big Grin

I was never officially warned before being suspended.....the forum did not follow their own rule. In fact, after I told KC what I did, I asked him if I was under probation or something. He told me I wasn't under any probation or restraint....which turned out to be a flat out lie.

Vosur, Anjele, Hanoff.....have you learned nothing in my absence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2014, 07:44 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
You are not required to stay here.

If you do stay, you aren't in a position to write or rewrite rules. So, how about, get over yourself.

See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Anjele's post
17-03-2014, 07:45 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
Yeah, 'cause whining about rules has worked so well for you in the past.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
17-03-2014, 07:46 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
(17-03-2014 07:44 PM)Anjele Wrote:  You are not required to stay here.

If you do stay, you aren't in a position to write or rewrite rules. So, how about, get over yourself.

Anjele,

This forum is title, "Forum Issues, Suggestions, Comments".

What part of that title is to hard for you to understand?

Vosur, Anjele, Hanoff.....have you learned nothing in my absence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2014, 07:46 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
[Image: tantrum.gif]

See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
17-03-2014, 07:47 PM
RE: My suspension and the need for an anti-flaming rule
I made comments...having trouble grasping that?

See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: