Poor Gonz’, I’ll miss him. Talk about completely harmless.
There seems to be a widely-held opinion that Gonzo’s recent violation was at worst minor, and that he’s an OK guy not really harmful to the Board. In fact, as others say, some who provoke Gonzo may be even “nastier” than Gonzo, but able to avoid punishable offense by clever phrasing.
Why not a compromise? Reinstate Diogenes and Gonzomax, but with rights to post only in IMHO, Pit, and Mundane.
Some of the descriptions of Gonzo upthread seem wrong to me, and I wonder if he’s being conflated with another. The Gonzo posts I see are usually grammatical, forth-right, and not mean-spirited.
I do find it very interesting that there seems to be a Left-vs-Right divide on Gonzo. I found myself often agreeing with Gonzo, while wishing a more articulate Doper were taking up the “progressive” case. There are posters from the “Right” whose messages seem nastier and less intelligent than those of Gonzo, yet I’ve not seen the right-leaning Gonzo-bashers ever condemn them.
How about it? In the spirit of World Peace and Amity, let these two Dopers come back, at least on a restricted-forum basis.
You’re joking I hope. If they are banned, they are banned.
And what the fuck does Diogenes getting the flick have to do with Gonzo being given the shove anyway?
I’m going to be blunt with you here: there is nothing to compromise on because this is not up for a vote or a negotiation. We’re not going to revisit bannings based on public requests months after the fact. If these posters wanted back in, they could contact us, but this isn’t a referendum.
I’m not sure where you got the idea that these two posters were OK in some forums and not others, but it’s incorrect - they both had warnings from IMHO and/or MPSIMS and other forums. They may have had more warnings in GD than elsewhere - I don’t know for a fact that that’s true and I don’t have time to check right now - but they not only break the rules in GD. The rules are pretty much the same in all forums, and they both had many, many warnings about their behavior. Personally I’m not inclined to spend the time creating new usergroups (which is not impossible but is apparently more annoying and complex than I assumed) and making up new rules to give them an opportunity to come back and do the same things that got them 15 warnings apiece, a suspension, and then a ban.
Your post reflects exactly what Pretty Vacant is getting at: A smug “sorry you feel that way” insularity that only pretends to tolerate and consider dissenting ideas.
Sadly, quite a few have heeded your condescending advice over the years.
I’m sorry it seemed condescending to you. I was sincere in saying that I didn’t understand. I was sincerely seeking information. Apparently you have none for me. (Yes, I did intend that last sentence to be a tiny bit condescending.)
Widely-held? I only just now noticed this thread like 10 days after it first went up. In that time it’s only barely gone over 100 posts. If he was that likeable I’d’ve expected rioting. Heck, the Dio thread passed 300 posts in a day.
And popularity or likeability has never brought someone back from the banned list. It may stave off banning for longer than usual, but once that axe drops it doesn’t get retracted.