Much like any attempt to have rational discussion with you. It seems to me that, generally speaking, anything the moderators do on this board, you disapprove of. Why is that? Why is it that you constantly object to virtually any decision they make? If you dislike the way this place is run, why do you stay?
Oh, for fuck’s sake. You’re not a lawyer, so why the attempt at a cross-examination? The decision has been made. The reasons have been explained. You have your panties in the biggest wad over this. I doubt seriously that handsomeharry is still going on about being banned. Yet you’re never content to just disagree and say “okay.” You have to keep at it. We know you disapprove. Your opinion is noted. Now shut up about it.
The Pit? The sub forum where posters tend to be aggressive and nasty, quite often with no justification? Somehow special snowflakes feel so entitled to demand answers that if not supplied a person can be banned? Seems like a mod was looking for an excuse.
It’s The Pit. How much self control does it really take to not participate in that one thread?
[Moderating]
This is inappropriately personal for ATMB. The thread is not about Shodan or his motivations for posting here. Dial it back.
[/Moderating]
Yip. Trolling or particularly egregious jerkishness has always been an exception to the general practice.
That said, I would have been fine with a Warning about how he could be banned for trolling, and that he must stop, with the thread being closed. And I would not mind if his banning was turned into a suspension instead.
I mean, he was here for 12 years and was able not to troll most of that time. So I think he could possibly continue to post here without causing problems. And that is the reason we ban people, right? Because we think there’s no hope of reform?
Still, I can’t get too worked up over this one. I think any troll should be concerned about being banned, even if they don’t have any warnings or suspensions. Plus, while the poster in question apparently never had any formal Warnings, I’ve seen him moderated at least a few times for crappy behavior. I always thought he played with the “line” a bit.
I weigh this part of your post more than you do. (No worries, just saying.) The occasional instaban of a long time member for flagrant trolling discourages line dancers. Which is all to the good. IMHO.
All true of course but as we all know the moderators do not ban under such arbitrary principles. They act under the guidelines of the board rules. It was the reason for the banning under those rules for which I sought clarification. Miller’s upthread response to me and details provided here by other mods satisfactorily resolved any doubts I had. HH was banned not for his politics but his trolling. Fair enough.
Yes, it happens all the time. For some announced positions, as in the case of handsomeharry, it is trolling and gets an insta-ban. That was the ruling.
That’s why this statement is false -
handsomeharry was banned because his response of insults to insults in the Pit is trolling when it is done by someone with an unpopular view.
hndsomeharry did what everyone else does in the Pit - responded to insults with insults. Because he had an unpopular view, this is trolling. He was banned for doing what everyone else does in the Pit, because of his unpopular view.
We don’t ban people for having unpopular views as long as they do what everyone else does. We just ban them for doing what everyone else does if they have unpopular views.
Czarcasm and Superdude respond to me with insults, and not even in the Pit. But they don’t have unpopular views, so they don’t even get a Warning. handsomeharry responds to insults with insults, and in the venue where it is appropriate to trade insults. He also doesn’t get a Warning - he gets banned.
But we don’t treat the expression of unpopular views differently.
We treat the expression of incredibly inflammatory views differently. “Nazi” is far, far more than just “unpopular”. Do you really believe that (with the same subsequent behavior) he would have been banned if his declaration had been “I am a conservative Republican” instead of being a Nazi?
Ah, now I see. Obviously you are talking about some other Pit thread than the rest of us are reading. In the Pit thread I saw, hh came out of the gate swinging, in the very first post pre-emptively insulting anyone who might at some point consider taking issue with his OP, and basically blowing raspberries at the first few responders (not including myself) who, understandably enough, asked a few fairly neutral questions as to what he was on about.
Now, I think at least one in-thread warnng for trolling would not have gone amiss, but on the other hand it seems fairly clear that for whatever reason the guy was going for suicide by Mod, and a warning or two likely wouldn’t have made a blind bit of difference.
Anyway, would you mind linking to the entirely different thread you seem to be talking about, so we can compare the two?
It is entirely reasonable, if one **already **holds the view that moderators are unfairly biased against certain viewpoints in their official responses to posts, to see hh’s banning as further evidence of a lower level of tolerance of posters with those and similar viewpoints. It is also entirely reasonable, if one doesn’t already hold such a view, to focus on the poor behavior rather than the viewpoint being espoused as the cause of the banning.
Well, most of the discussions in the Pit I wouldn’t tolerate in my home.
On the fence on this one, to be honest. On the one side, it was the Pit, and that’s where you are supposed to be able to troll and insult folks to your hearts content. It’s also not a debate forum, so there should and really is no expectation of debate there (though there was this one Fukushima thread…). On the other hand, HH did call out a poster who hasn’t posted in a while in a thread that was 5+ years old, which was a bit over the top. It seemed to me to be a fairly obvious attempt at a flame out as some posters do from time to time.
HH is certainly not a sympathetic poster and I doubt many are shedding any tears that he’s been banned. I think what some are taking exception to is the seemingly arbitrary and abrupt manner in which he was dispatched and the venue he was dispatched in, i.e. the Pit. Like I said…I’m on the fence on this one. Glad it wasn’t my call.
If it is, officially, then it’s a ‘rule’ that’s broken constantly and is more winked at than any other. People troll each other all the time in the Pit. Hell, that’s exactly what pitting someone IS…you are calling them out and trolling them to come into the thread to be abused.
If I invite anyone into my house, and say that I am not going to kick anyone out even if they express an offensive position, and then someone in my house expresses an offensive position and I kick him out, I wouldn’t pretend that the rule was that I am not going to kick anyone out even if he expresses an offensive position.