While I did have a few problems with C#3 myself (and got stomped on, and deservedly so) you would have to agree that doing things like posting the same harassing questions about the moderators across the board would tend to disrupt the flow of conversation. Like I have said before, try to act like this is a great party, and act accordingly. Shout a bit, sing loudly and badly, drink a bit too much, flirt a bit too much, start a great conversation. But if you screw with the hosts, after both they and the other guests have told you to cut it out repeatedly, and you get what you deserve.
Thank you, David B., for the clarification - and for your advice about following the instructions of the moderators and administrators. Actually, it seems… well… almost laughably simple. After all, we are guests here, and it seems only sensible that one would seek to follow the wishes of ones hosts. But then, it would also seem only sensible to try and live peaceably with ones neighbors, too. Apparently, Contestant #3 wasn’t particularly good at either.
And thank you as well, TubaDiva - though I sincerely hope I’ve not somehow given you the impression that I suspected that the administration of the SDMB would make unreasonable demands of its members. I really only wished to know what the rules are so that I might not unwittingly violate them, as I imagined might have been the case with Contestant #3, and suffer a similar fate. Thank you for taking the time to make it clear that “unwittingly” didn’t fit into the equation at all. I understand perfectly, and appreciate the relative freedom afforded by the board, and the responsibility that comes with it, on the part of both its members and its administration. The only reason the question arose in the first place was that I somehow couldn’t fathom anyone so seriously lacking in (what I took for) common sense that they could actually manage to have themselves evicted, and so suspected the breaking of some lesser known rule.
One final question, if I may, and then I promise to abandon the issue altogether. Curiousity compels me to ask whether a moderator would voice his or her displeasure in a personal way - via email, for example - or from within the content of a thread, where it might escape the notice of the individual to whom it was addressed?
I can answer that one, Palidori. After one of my many stumbles on this board I was contacted by a moderator via e-mail. I would have been highly upset about this except for two things-1.The moderator was right.
2.The moderator was polite.
This screwed up my plans for a multi-spam revenge e-mailing, and for that I say to the whole Board Curse you! Curse the whole lot of you! ;).
There’s certainly no high bar for C3 to beat to be back here, and he probably is or will be. We may knock him off, and even in that case he may not get flushed right away if he doesn’t immediately raise the hackles of the MB operators. There’s certainly no specific limit on user names. I was christened by Mike King, and I realize some may not find my username attractive. I wouldn’t think for a minute of banning Adolph on the basis of his moniker. Satan has opinions, but, hey, personality is a big part of getting through life and he doesn’t go out of his way to offend (anyone but jodih). We’ve also got GOD lurking out there and who knows what else?
Martyr #7 posts a thread about Bibles and Aliens. . .
. . .but this isn’t the place to be making wild-eyed accusations
It’s cool to be black in America. You get all this extra attention from sales people in fancy stores.
–SterlingNorth, First Runner-Up
Think about it this way . . .
If someone who has been banned shows up under a new screen name and they misbehave, we have exactly the same recourse we did before – we can ban them.
If someone who has been banned shows up under a new screen name and they act nicely, what’s the problem here?
Either way, where’s the downside? 
We do try to be considerate of people’s feelings . . . and when appropriate, private email is what’s used. In fact, that’s first. However, sometimes it’s more appropriate to say something in the context of the thread; for example, in some of the “test” threads, where it’s better to show someone how to do something correctly. Not meant to embarrass, just meant to demonstrate.
your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope
PS I love that “party” analogy, btw; that’s the best way to put it I’ve seen. And we want this to be a GREAT party!
As if it wasn’t obvious already…
http://www.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000208-2.html
Martyr #7’s response.
Enough said.
“Being a jerk, minus a million points” - Homer Simpson
Melin said:
" I would say that if the name “Adolf Hitler” is to be banned, then the name “Satan” ought to be banned, too. "
Another “historically impaired” example…
Melin, please. Comparing a username that signifies an anti-Christ, whose existence isn’t even proved, to one that clearly states the name of the most horrible dictator and mass murderer in modern history is an absolute disgrace.
I’m pretty sure you weren’t brought up by people who were directly affected by the war. I know for a fact, that a lot of Americans understand the sensitiveness of WWII just as well as we Europeans do, even two generations down the line.
And that’s the NICE explanation I have for your remark. The other one belongs in The Pit, I’m afraid.
Sorry for hijacking this thread. You’ve paid your ransom by reading it - here, take it back.
Coldfire
“You know how complex women are”
- Neil Peart, Rush (1993)
There seems to be a misunderstanding about why Contestant #3 got banned, with some claiming he got booted for making an honest mistake. Not so. C#3 posted a link to a site that in our opinion invited participation in a pyramid marketing scheme. We do not permit commercial solicitations on this site and deleted the message. The forum moderator also posted a general notice saying not to post a link to this site again. C#3 reposted the link, which was again deleted. He posted it a third time, this time apparently disguised; the disguised URL linked to a porn site. (We presume this was inadvertent.) C#3 sent an E-mail to the forum moderator that included such comments as “Fuck you very much” and “take some Ex-lax you dick.” He also posted a message saying, “Some dickheads don’t realize that links to sites that don’t sell things aren’t SPAM,” etc.
The forum moderator deleted these posts and called for help. C#3 had been repeatedly told not to do something and went ahead and did it anyway, and was obscene and abusive in the process. I realized that banning was mostly a symbolic gesture, since it is easy to get a new E-mail account and re-register under a different name. But the alternative was to do nothing and confirm C#3 in his evident belief that the rules didn’t apply to him and he could do anything he wanted. C#3 has a long history of taunting moderators; users may remember he called another moderator a “fucking ignorant twat.”
Fact is, we were fed up with the guy, so he got the boot. Maybe an hour went by before he got a new account and started posting again. We’ll attempt to delete those new registrations when they come to our attention–unless, of course, the-poster-formerly-known-as-C#3 should adopt such a sweet and reasonable persona that we can’t tell it’s him. We regret that our other users have to put up with this and can only hope that C#3 will get a job or find some other way to occupy his time.
Sorry Coldfire, doesn’t wash. For hundreds of millions of people, Adolf Hitler was only Satan’s minion. The name Satan has been an equivalent to evil for hundreds or thousands of years. Ban one, ban the other.
-Melin
Since C#3 is, as we understand it, currently occupying most of his time with his wife who is in the hospital for breast cancer, as posted in a thread in GQ, this comment seems more-than-usually acerbic, if not downright nasty.
-Melin
Melin, I’m genuinely sorry that Connie’s wife has cancer. I truly am. And I told him so on the post where he disclosed it.
But that doesn’t give him the right to hijack these boards and be an abusive asshole.
-Leslie
Leslie Irish Evans
http://leslie.scrappy.net
If Contestant_3 has a wife in the hospital, WHY is he spending so much time on this message board bothering people?
Maybe I just haven’t been looking in the right places, but I haven’t seen C#3 be an abusive asshole in months.
THANK YOU ED!
Good riddance C#3 - YAH!
>^,^<
KITTEN
If ignorance is bliss, you must be orgasmic.
Under that rationale, Melin, may I ask that the name “God” be banned?
“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy
Just for the record, and serving as devil’s advocate formally, the following:
-
Ed’s post on what made him banish C#3 to the Nether Regions was, I think, totally clear. To quote Lazarus Long, “I support your right to free speech. But we’re paying for this hall. If you don’t like our rules, go buy your own soapbox.” I think Ed and Co. employed fair tactics in getting a cessation of what they found repeated and egregious violations.
-
That said, I have never had a personal problem with C#3. I dislike his in-your-face style, but that’s taste.
-
Now, for banning people for having obnoxious screen names: that goes several steps beyond being just plain dumb. Tom of ~ndebb could take offense, for example, at my having claimed a saint of the church as my username. GOD formerly posted here (haven’t seen him/her much lately). Has anyone objected to Imthecowgodmoo? Might be offensive to Hindus who use the board? Brian used the username Satan for reasons he’s posted in one of the Where’d Your Name Come From? threads in MPSIMS, and has made it very clear where he’s coming from. Adolph Hitler is being a bit of a jerk, but he’s clearly playing a persona. Either he’ll mellow, get tired of the persona and drop off, or get into an argument with an administrator and repeat the C#3 process. Whichever way it goes, end of story. (As a clever aside, given the last line of the interview in Triumph of the Straight Dope, should we maybe take offense at the Administrator posting under the name of “Ed Zotti”?)
-
Several people have, however, noted that the Terms of Service uses some broad terminology that could easily be construed to be regularly violated. (Heck, I’ve done it myself in the Great Debates thread on Gay Marriages/Parenting…if that is not related to “sexually oriented” it would be hard to figure out what is.) Perhaps if those general terms were more clearly spelled out, or if it was emphasized that Administrator discretion is involved, that might make life a bit easier for those who worry about the potential of violating them, or whether someone else’s post did.
I have a rather eye-opening post about this whole matter here: http://www.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000325.html
Sharing private emails now Ed?
Hmmm…imagine the possibilities…
Hey E. Romero,
C#3 says that he was only there yesterday for an outpatient procedure for installation of a medi-port for future delivery of chemotherapy. His wife is at home and zonked out on pain pills.