# handsomeharry has been banned **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 27, 2016, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236 "2016-04-27T02:34:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/322 "2016-05-02T19:30:39Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > SO? he was banned for one thread, without warning. Yep. That’s a thing that can—and sometimes should—happen. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/323 "2016-05-02T20:10:34Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > They used their judgment and determined that the specific way he was trolling was so egregious as to be immediate-banning worthy. It’s a judgment call – they decided that this was _so bad_ that he _didn’t_ deserve a note or a warning before being banned. > > That’s why. You might disagree, but that’s why they did it – they thought that the violation was so bad that he didn’t deserve a warning before being banned. Okay. HH starts his thread and a starts a trolling (supposedly). Given his history and some other folks hate for him ( I have little doubt he was was actually on somebodies ACTUAL list…so sad but that is a different thread) I also have little doubt he was reported quite soon into the thread. How long between when he was reported and a mod bothered to give a warning or a whistle or a knock it off till “we” decide whether this behavior is a violation or not? I suspect HH was on the mods radar quit soon…but they did nothing and said nothing (apologies to Sgt Shultz) because they wanted HH to hang himself. IMO any OTHER long term poster would have been warned post haste. But because it was HH they let it go on because it served their purpose. HH was banned because of his beliefs. Other folks have given their reasons why here. I’ve added another one. I think it quite telling that even BEFORE anyone complained the mods were already typing up an explanation as to WHY HH was banned (because they knew it would be controversial). There was NO requirement to ban HH. It wasn’t some legal catch 22. HH was banned so that the mods could ban someone considered “bad”…then they came up with a plausible excuse of trolling so they could feel all better and righteous about it. Look we banned HH because of trolling…not his views…aren’t we all openminded and stuff. Hey, your party your rules. Ban that sucker for his obnoxious views if you must. But don’t put lipstick on that pig and claim it’s Bo Derek. ALL this controversy could have been avoided if he had been warned…or even suspended…which IMO virtually ANY other long term poster here would have gotten for “trolling” (is to laugh) in the PIT. But no, the mods had to yet again snatch controversy from the jaws of reasonableness. My opinion of course (with a little mind reading which seems to be all the rage in these parts recently). ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/324 "2016-05-02T20:15:51Z")
I think I like the Mods story better, since they were in on the discussion about what to do about the thread. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/325 "2016-05-02T20:21:07Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I think I like the Mods story better, since they were in on the discussion about what to do about the thread. Like John Mace’s recent “controversial” thread where they talked about it for a week, but didn’t actually include the poster in the discussion? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/326 "2016-05-02T20:25:12Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Okay. > > HH starts his thread and a starts a trolling (supposedly). Given his history and some other folks hate for him ( I have little doubt he was was actually on somebodies ACTUAL list…so sad but that is a different thread) I also have little doubt he was reported quite soon into the thread. > > How long between when he was reported and a mod bothered to give a warning or a whistle or a knock it off till “we” decide whether this behavior is a violation or not? > > I suspect HH was on the mods radar quit soon…but they did nothing and said nothing (apologies to Sgt Shultz) because they wanted HH to hang himself. > > IMO any OTHER long term poster would have been warned post haste. But because it was HH they let it go on because it served their purpose. > > HH was banned because of his beliefs. Other folks have given their reasons why here. I’ve added another one. > > I think it quite telling that even BEFORE anyone complained the mods were already typing up an explanation as to WHY HH was banned (because they knew it would be controversial). > > There was NO requirement to ban HH. It wasn’t some legal catch 22. > > HH was banned so that the mods could ban someone considered “bad”…then they came up with a plausible excuse of trolling so they could feel all better and righteous about it. > > Look we banned HH because of trolling…not his views…aren’t we all openminded and stuff. > > Hey, your party your rules. > > Ban that sucker for his obnoxious views if you must. But don’t put lipstick on that pig and claim it’s Bo Derek. > > ALL this controversy could have been avoided if he had been warned…or even suspended…which IMO virtually ANY other long term poster here would have gotten for “trolling” (is to laugh) in the PIT. > > But no, the mods had to yet again snatch controversy from the jaws of reasonableness. > > My opinion of course (with a little mind reading which seems to be all the rage in these parts recently). It’s possible that the moderators are not honestly presenting what happened and your analysis is correct. I’m inclined to take their word for it and assume they aren’t lying, and that he was banned because he was trolling. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/327 "2016-05-02T20:27:56Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Okay. > > HH starts his thread and a starts a trolling (supposedly). Given his history and some other folks hate for him ( I have little doubt he was was actually on somebodies ACTUAL list…so sad but that is a different thread) I also have little doubt he was reported quite soon into the thread. > > How long between when he was reported and a mod bothered to give a warning or a whistle or a knock it off till “we” decide whether this behavior is a violation or not? > > I suspect HH was on the mods radar quit soon…but they did nothing and said nothing (apologies to Sgt Shultz) because they wanted HH to hang himself. > > IMO any OTHER long term poster would have been warned post haste. But because it was HH they let it go on because it served their purpose. > > HH was banned because of his beliefs. Other folks have given their reasons why here. I’ve added another one. > > I think it quite telling that even BEFORE anyone complained the mods were already typing up an explanation as to WHY HH was banned (because they knew it would be controversial). > > There was NO requirement to ban HH. It wasn’t some legal catch 22. > > HH was banned so that the mods could ban someone considered “bad”…then they came up with a plausible excuse of trolling so they could feel all better and righteous about it. > > Look we banned HH because of trolling…not his views…aren’t we all openminded and stuff. > > Hey, your party your rules. > > Ban that sucker for his obnoxious views if you must. But don’t put lipstick on that pig and claim it’s Bo Derek. > > ALL this controversy could have been avoided if he had been warned…or even suspended…which IMO virtually ANY other long term poster here would have gotten for “trolling” (is to laugh) in the PIT. > > But no, the mods had to yet again snatch controversy from the jaws of reasonableness. > > My opinion of course (with a little mind reading which seems to be all the rage in these parts recently). Not surprisingly, this is all completely wrong. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/328 "2016-05-02T20:35:10Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Not surprisingly, this is all completely wrong. Okay. When was he first reported? When was he warned? When was he banned? ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/329 "2016-05-02T20:36:26Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Okay. > > HH starts his thread and a starts a trolling (supposedly). Given his history and some other folks hate for him ( I have little doubt he was was actually on somebodies ACTUAL list…so sad but that is a different thread) I also have little doubt he was reported quite soon into the thread. What history is that? I honestly had no idea who this guy was until he popped up and started sigging his heil all over the pit. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/330 "2016-05-02T20:44:57Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > What history is that? I honestly had no idea who this guy was until he popped up and started sigging his heil all over the pit. Well, to be fair his “history” with people who know his “history”. But there are people that do with a capital D. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/331 "2016-05-02T20:55:43Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Okay. > > When was he first reported? > > When was he warned? > > When was he banned? I don’t know if he was reported or not. I don’t get reports from the Pit. He wasn’t warned, as you know. Check the announcement for when he was banned. The opinions you state about the process and our motivations about banning him are pure fantasy on your part. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/332 "2016-05-02T21:06:12Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > I don’t know if he was reported or not. I don’t get reports from the Pit. > > He wasn’t warned, as you know. > > Check the announcement for when he was banned. > > The opinions you state about the process and our motivations about banning him are pure fantasy on your part. I don’t know. I only read the first 4 pages or so of that thread. But you make my point. He was just “trolling” along and got banned. Yes, I could look up the time when he was banned. Which IIRC was about a WEEK after the thread started (hmmm). Question IS…how long between the reporting and the banning? Or the reporting and the mod note knock it off? And for that matter, did any mods here read the HH thread and do nothing until there was a report from a SDMB citizen? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/333 "2016-05-02T21:11:28Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > I don’t know. I only read the first 4 pages or so of that thread. But you make my point. He was just “trolling” along and got banned. > > Yes, I could look up the time when he was banned. Which IIRC was about a WEEK after the thread started (hmmm). Question IS…how long between the reporting and the banning? Or the reporting and the mod note knock it off? > > And for that matter, did any mods here read the HH thread and do nothing until there was a report from a SDMB citizen? You sure have a lot of questions. The trouble is, you’ve given no indication that you are in the mood to believe any of the answers given. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/334 "2016-05-02T21:15:37Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > I don’t know. I only read the first 4 pages or so of that thread. But you make my point. He was just “trolling” along and got banned. > > Yes, I could look up the time when he was banned. Which IIRC was about a WEEK after the thread started (hmmm). Question IS…how long between the reporting and the banning? Or the reporting and the mod note knock it off? > > And for that matter, did any mods here read the HH thread and do nothing until there was a report from a SDMB citizen? None of this has anything to do with the ridiculous scenario you imagine. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/335 "2016-05-02T21:19:53Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > I don’t know. I only read the first 4 pages or so of that thread. But you make my point. He was just “trolling” along and got banned. > > Yes, I could look up the time when he was banned. Which IIRC was about a WEEK after the thread started (hmmm). Question IS…how long between the reporting and the banning? Or the reporting and the mod note knock it off? > > And for that matter, did any mods here read the HH thread and do nothing until there was a report from a SDMB citizen? Wouldn’t be the first time someone was summarily banned for trolling after being given a very long rope. That was before warnings were implemented, though. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/336 "2016-05-02T21:21:48Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Wouldn’t be the first time someone was summarily banned for trolling after being given a very long rope. That was before warnings were implemented, though. Pretty much, it’s the first time in the last few years this has occurred. Yes, in the long past it happened a few times, but user protest brought the system of 'always warn first". This brings back the bad old days. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/337 "2016-05-02T21:23:10Z")
_What_ “bad old days”?? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/338 "2016-05-02T21:25:52Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Pretty much, it’s the first time in the last few years this has occurred. Yes, in the long past it happened a few times, but user protest brought the system of 'always warn first". This brings back the bad old days. Yeah, the bad old days, where Nazis couldn’t count on a couple of warnings for their trolling before getting kicked off the board. It’s practically Jim Crow around here. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/339 "2016-05-02T21:27:04Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Pretty much, it’s the first time in the last few years this has occurred. Yes, in the long past it happened a few times, but user protest brought the system of 'always warn first". This brings back the bad old days. Meh. I’ve no problem with summarily banning anyone whose handle might as well be “I’m a troll!” in bright red neon. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/340 "2016-05-02T21:40:27Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > HH starts his thread and a starts a trolling (supposedly). Given his history and some other folks hate for him ( I have little doubt he was was actually on somebodies ACTUAL list…so sad but that is a different thread) I also have little doubt he was reported quite soon into the thread. I had no idea who **handsomeharry** was before that thread. After reading that, and the five year old pitting that inspired it, I remember there being some speculation that his screen name was a reference to “hh,” which is a common white supremacist code for “Heil Hitler.” But if you’d asked me a month ago, “What sort of poster is **handsomehenry**?” I’d have said, “Who?” Judging from a responses to this thread, that seems to be a fairly common reaction. **FinnAgain** probably remembers him, but that guy hasn’t posted here in years. I suspect he was actually on very few people’s “lists.” > [@](#): > > How long between when he was reported and a mod bothered to give a warning or a whistle or a knock it off till “we” decide whether this behavior is a violation or not? As you know, he didn’t receive any such message. > [@](#): > > I suspect HH was on the mods radar quit soon…but they did nothing and said nothing (apologies to Sgt Shultz) because they wanted HH to hang himself. First report was about four hours after the thread was started, but wasn’t about **hh**. **harry** himself wasn’t reported until four days later, when people started to notice that he was trolling. There were five more reports on the 24th, two of them just for editing a quote (It was a fair edit, in my view, so I didn’t mod it). One of the reports was for a post where **harry** said something like, “Now **handsomeharry** plays with the mouse,” which was perceived as an admission of trolling. There were no further reports made from that thread. I started a thread in the mod loop suggesting we ban **harry** as a troll the next day, on the 25th. We discussed the subject for about two days, and then I banned him on the 26th. > [@](#): > > IMO any OTHER long term poster would have been warned post haste. But because it was HH they let it go on because it served their purpose. To demonstrate that, you need to find another long term poster who suddenly decided to troll that hard out-of-the-blue, and show that we treated him more gently than **handsomeharry**. The closest example I know of was **SqrlCub** ’s Halloween “prank” thread, which also earned an insta-ban. > [@](#): > > HH was banned because of his beliefs. Other folks have given their reasons why here. I’ve added another one. He wasn’t. He was banned for his behavior. You can invent all the reason why he might have been banned for some other reason, but none of them are going to be true. He was banned for the reasons already laid out, repeatedly and at length, in this thread. If you want to assume that we’re lying when we explain why we banned him, well, that’s entirely your perogative. Not sure what the point of you posting here is, if you think we’re liars, though: presumably, any response we make to your \ devastating investigative skills would also be dismissed as a lie, if it doesn’t match the narrative you want to be true here. > [@](#): > > I think it quite telling that even BEFORE anyone complained the mods were already typing up an explanation as to WHY HH was banned (because they knew it would be controversial). We always post explanations for bannings of long time members. There’s nothing at all remarkable about that in this situation. > [@](#): > > There was NO requirement to ban HH. It wasn’t some legal catch 22. Likewise, there’s no requirement that we warn or suspend someone before we ban them. Enforcement of the rules is entirely up to the discretion of the moderation staff. > [@](#): > > HH was banned so that the mods could ban someone considered “bad”…then they came up with a plausible excuse of trolling so they could feel all better and righteous about it. If we just wanted to feel good and righteous about it, we’d just say, “We banned him because he’s a Nazi, and fuck Nazis.” I mean, he’s a Nazi. Since when does anyone need to invent a justification for treating a Nazi like shit? But that’s not actually why we banned him. We banned him because he was trolling, as we’ve already explained. > [@](#): > > ALL this controversy could have been avoided if he had been warned…or even suspended…which IMO virtually ANY other long term poster here would have gotten for “trolling” (is to laugh) in the PIT. Sure. But we generally try not to base our moderating actions based on how much blowback we get, so much as how necessary the action is to the good of the boards. And the blowback here is pretty minimal. I’m pretty comfortable with the responses this thread has received, over all. Not everyone is pleased, sure, but pleasing everyone isn’t actually part of my job description. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236/341 "2016-05-02T21:53:40Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Well, to be fair his “history” with people who know his “history”. But there are people that do with a capital D. I have absolutely **no idea** what this means. Could you try again with a capital T? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handsomeharry-has-been-banned/753236.md?page=18)