Wicked Clown
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2014, 02:53 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:51 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(29-08-2014 02:46 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, it doesn't.

You have made the 'there should be no abortions because you might abort the next Beethoven' argument.
Not once, not ever, has anyone called for the ban of someone who later turned out to be "an awesome member".
And we are not the police and we are not locking anyone up. That is a stupid analogy.

And you imply that we select administrators that don't have sufficient wisdom or judgement to make that kind of determination. We have a structure of governance here that prevents an admin from banning for bad reasons. The ban can be undone, that admin can be removed.

It's the exact same principle but in a different circumstance. You just don't wanna admit that.

Because it's not the same principle.

Quote:Oh, and no we don't. If the Admins decide to ban someone that's final. If aurora and DL decide they wanna ban me or you tomorrow then we're gone. No pleading our case, no appeal, gone.

Who says? You? Of course it can be undone.

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
29-08-2014, 02:53 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:27 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  Because once's that precedent has been set then it will get used more and more and we will lose potentially awesome members because of it. It's the exact same reason we have a legal system that can see suspected murderers walk free even though the police "know" they're guilty (and how many people here would promote a legal system that allow the police to lock up people without trial indefinitely just because they "knew" it was the right thing to do?).

And I know people may say that losing the odd good member by mistake is a good price to pay to see off certain others but that's very easy to say when you aren't the one being booted. I mean, if the Admins did decide to ban anyone they subjectively thought was a "problem" but they one day they decided you were a problem and banned you, would you congratulate that decision?
I know you're a boyscout dude. I am not a boyscout. I see your potential consequences and I say fuck it, let's give it a go. Also I see this being a bit far-fetched. He's one malignant fucker, like many malignant fuckers before him, and I'd be happy to see the back of him.

If that carries a potential consequence of me being banned - why should I give a shit? I like TTA and the guys here but it's not a thing I fear.

Quote:He wasn't allowed to flaunt the rules. He made a joke that broke a rule, and was warned. He also posted that smiley which was removed but, before that happened half the FT didn't realise that smileys could be classed as porn (still not sure on the legality btw), and some of us had even posted similar stuff ourselves (and before anyone says that it's obviously porn, no-one has ever reported a similar post until WC posted one). Given that half the team were unclear on that specific aspect of that rule it's kinda hard to expect newbies to be perfectly clear on it.
Speaking personally, I couldn't give less of a shit if he's broken a rule or not. But he has been extremely creepy to several members.

Edit: Plus why is rule 5 not applicable?

Post-edit edit: I guess I better check what rule 5 says.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 02:54 PM (This post was last modified: 29-08-2014 11:48 PM by TheGulegon.)
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 01:48 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(29-08-2014 01:40 PM)Ferdinand Wrote:  Well you know what I don't like? The economy. Let me bitch about that instead.

No what we don't like is that this guy was allowed to flaunt the rules after already chasing off a forum member. Then instead of being kicked, as he should have been, he is given this bullshit 2 week sentence so he can continue his games. If instead of fretting over every single thing the admins would just make a fucking decision for a change there would be nothing to bitch about.

I wonder if any of the people who used to have weekly skype-voice-chats with that former contributing member still do so, or if they'd prefer to have one with that guy from the treatment facility Dodgy

The fact that I still refuse to type out the name of that former contributing member while that guy from the looney bin can still see it to send that name a future PM full of "you're a whiney pussy bitch" should say it all.

But if we're going all full speech; if that former contributing member ever comes back, and speaks very loudly to others who might contribute here, to instead donate their money to an Atheist site that actually bans people who don't need to be interacting with anyone that's not a professional Doctor, Nurse, or Therapist, (because they're already in the fucking looney bin [if we can even trust that]) I hope that member is not banned for saving people money Undecided

I'm with Adrianime! I've personally highlighted where that guy went from "fuck you", to "I'm sorry; I love you guys", right back to "fuck you" in just 3 posts! His apologies are almost as disingenuous as me saying "I'll never lick a woman's asshole, ever again" Dodgy At least the contributing member who was chased off had nice things to say to people, and even when that member's feelings were hurt, that member simply expressed the hurt, never lashed out at anybody.

Losing that caring and compassionate contributing member makes me sad and a little angry; sure as fuck doesn't make me want to become butt buddies with the asshole who frightened them into leaving Angry
become butt buddies with an asshole Consider Legit!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like TheGulegon's post
29-08-2014, 02:58 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I'm pretty sure "BUT SLIPPERY SLOPE LOL" is not a very good reason to do or not do anything.

No system is administered flawless and no policy is free of either pros or cons.

Your first sentence is dumb, and tbh not worthy of you. What I stated was the most likely progression of events. MD said why can't we just act in a way that isn't in keeping with how we do thing on this one occasion. Say we did that. Are you really gonna try and argue that it's unreasonable to suggest that people would want to do the exact same thing again? Why wouldn't we do the exact same thing again? Like I said, totally beneath you.

Second sentence, this I agree with. The pro of Chas' approach is there are no undesirables, the con Chas' approach is that a select few people choose what constitutes an undesirable. That's why on most forums, you can get banned for criticising the Mods. It's strangely common that when Mods start banning anyone who's a "dick", the first people they turn to are their critics. The pro of the current system is that everyone is treated fairly. The con is that we may have the odd undesirable who creates the odd thread that people who don't wanna see it have to avoid clicking on. Given those choices of pros and cons, I prefer the Stark model.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 03:02 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:58 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  The pro of Chas' approach is there are no undesirables, the con Chas' approach is that a select few people choose what constitutes an undesirable.

Rolleyes A lot of members who've been here a long time are commenting on this particular undesirable. Not a select few.

Have you *ever* broken a rule in your life dude? Come join the dark side. We have cookies.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 03:03 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  Because it's not the same principle.

Then please, illustrate the differences in the principle (not the differences in the individual situations).

Quote:Who says? You? Of course it can be undone.

And who is gonna undo something that the Admins have decided on?

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 03:04 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 03:02 PM)morondog Wrote:  Have you *ever* broken a rule in your life dude? Come join the dark side. We have cookies.

Too many in my teen years, now I've grown up. I understand that I can't expect the world to conform to my subjective view of it. I have to formulate a fair and objective view and work towards that.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 03:04 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(29-08-2014 02:47 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It's funny to me how people on this forum complain about Christian's brainwashing children but then we seem to either abuse the kids once they have grown up or try to exclude them from our groups.

That is in no way relevant to this thread's subject.
It is actually.

We are talking about Wicked Clown and his experience on this forum as well as some people's call to have him banned (i.e. excluded).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 03:05 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 02:58 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(29-08-2014 02:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I'm pretty sure "BUT SLIPPERY SLOPE LOL" is not a very good reason to do or not do anything.

No system is administered flawless and no policy is free of either pros or cons.

Your first sentence is dumb, and tbh not worthy of you. What I stated was the most likely progression of events. MD said why can't we just act in a way that isn't in keeping with how we do thing on this one occasion. Say we did that. Are you really gonna try and argue that it's unreasonable to suggest that people would want to do the exact same thing again? Why wouldn't we do the exact same thing again? Like I said, totally beneath you.

Second sentence, this I agree with. The pro of Chas' approach is there are no undesirables, the con Chas' approach is that a select few people choose what constitutes an undesirable. That's why on most forums, you can get banned for criticising the Mods. It's strangely common that when Mods start banning anyone who's a "dick", the first people they turn to are their critics. The pro of the current system is that everyone is treated fairly. The con is that we may have the odd undesirable who creates the odd thread that people who don't wanna see it have to avoid clicking on. Given those choices of pros and cons, I prefer the Stark model.

Sigh. We already give the admins that power. If the admin(s) start doing that, they can be removed.

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
29-08-2014, 03:07 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(29-08-2014 03:03 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  And who is gonna undo something that the Admins have decided on?

If a popular member who did nothing to deserve it was banned you think there wouldn't be outcry? And you think that the Admin who made the decision without giving due cause would remain?

Sure, it can happen. We have a strong community here though - have a bit of faith that we as a community can actually do stuff without supervision.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: