Just curious, I didn’t see that one coming.
not difficult
He was banned because he was behaving TERRibly.
Not meaning this as an attack, but why the surprise. He regularly made racist and other assorted offensive posts. It was pretty obvious to me his days were numbered.
Was he ever moderated for racist posts?
Charles Barkley would like to have two seconds of your time.
Considering there’s no rule against racism, why would he be?
However people who engage in racism* and enjoy making racist posts* generally speaking engage in other behaviors that does get them disciplined.
*. I’ll leave that to others to determine whether doing so makes a person a racist.
I found his contributions to be of limited value and often obnoxious but I was wondering what the last straw was that got him banned after the prior 12k posts didn’t.
On those relatively rare occasions where a long term poster is banned there is usually a thread announcing it. There was in this case too (see post 2 and 3). On those even more rare occasions where a long term poster is banned and there is no announcement there is a reason for that and you are asked to PM a mod for an explanation.
I don’t know. You were the one who said it was a reason, not me.
Then it wasn’t any alleged racist posts that got him banned. Not sure why you felt the need to bring it up, but at least we cleared up that piece of misinformation.
No I didn’t. I’m sorry if you got that impression.
Everyone can read exactly what you wrote, so I’ll leave it at that.
I agree with John Mace. If you didn’t mean to imply the racism was part of his banning then why did you mention it?
You could not be more wrong.
mmm
Sounds to me like you got caught saying something wrong, but then tried to fix it where it would work.
I’ve done that from time to time. It results in people just thinking you’re even dumber. Everyone makes mistakes. But doubling down on them only makes you look stupider.
I understand you feel that way and perhaps I could have been clearer but my point was that Terr rather regularly made trollish posts.
Here’s what I said.
Notice my point was that he lots of other posts not just racist posts. There’s a word for what he engaged in “trolling”.
Now obviously, having been told by him directly by him that I should be searched every time I go to the airport because I’m Middle Eastern his racist posts strike me as standing out more than other offensive posts.
Since the guy who first objected has been a strong proponent of the idea that the term “racist” is a huge insult that should never, ever be used in SDMB even when describing people who claim black people are stupid, I’m not sure why it’s worth noting that trollish posts that are racist stick out more than non-racist trollish posts.
The point is that Terr was a troll who made lots of offensive posts, both racist and non-racist.
Why the shock over him being banned.
On another note, in response to John’s initial question as to whether Terr had ever been modded for racist posts. I suspect that he received mod notes for racist posts but the notes were not because the posts were deemed “racist” but because they were deemed “trollish” or something similar.
Let’s remember Tom, Jonathan Chance and others have regularly defended not automatically classifying blatantly racist posts by pointing out that posters who make racist posts usually get banned anyway.
So, if Big T would rather I reword it(which is reasonable because I was less than clear) I should have just said Terr was troll who made many offensive posts including grossly racist ones.
…and that furthermore there’s an odd but explicable correlation between those who make posts that are both racist and offensive and those who post gratuitously provocative commentary, despite the observation that the first is not a necessary condition of the second. Such that observing the first can lead some to infer the second.
But correlation is not causality!
Again, here with this statement, there was no need to mention the racism since it had nothing to do with his banning.
You could have stopped with the word “posts”.
Saying the statement you did is equivalent to saying:
“Terr was banned for making offensive posts and wearing shoes.”
So, again, the only reason for you to mention racism was that you were implying that that was part of the reason he was banned.
I didn’t read it that way, though admittedly I dropped by after he clarified. So it all blended together.
In a neighboring town some dishonest asshole was arrested for forgery and those who knew him may have not been surprised. He wasn’t arrested for being a dishonest asshole though. He was arrested for forgery. Is it surprising that a dishonest asshole was arrested? IMHO, no.
Is the analogy clear? I could give other examples. Post-clarification, I don’t see why folks are still hassling Ibn. He already said he wasn’t clear to begin with.