Just because **CarnalK **can’t wrap his head around a straight guy being able to judge a guy’s hotness doesn’t mean the OP was trolling.
Just because someone was posting about an insane, and therefore humorous, topic, doesn’t mean they can’t be sincere in their assessments.
Why do we need to decide if it’s funny or not? So we can persecute him for trolling? If that thread ‘got a rise out of people’ it’s their own issue.
Coming down on a new poster for playing a straight guy in a funny thread? What the hell is that? You’re the humorless teacher who goes up to kids on the playground asking if they thought what they just did was funny.
I don’t know why the OP got banned; maybe there was a good reason. I didn’t see that the thread needed to be closed, though.
I hate this whole process. It was a fine thread. I’m in a bad mood.
If the ‘hot or Nazi?’ topic wasn’t enough, there’s this:
The mods asked tarnation&eudemonia to get in touch a couple of days ago so these accounts could be merged. He hasn’t done that, and socking isn’t allowed. That would be reason for a ban by itself.
As Marley said, the banning was because he was a sock. I didn’t ban him for his behavior.
And threads by socks are typically closed.
As for the behavior, he insisted himself it wasn’t a humorous topic, to the point where he was arguing with posters in the thread about it (and quite snarkily for a new poster, at that). Posting a simple note to let him know to tone it down some is fine.
I’m not really familiar with the poster other than knowing he’s had another account. But the topic could be seen as trolling and calling a moderator a Nazi… let’s say it makes a very bad impression.
He didn’t insist it wasn’t a humorous topic. He insisted he was being sincere. There’s a difference.
The argument was started by the other posters (mostly CarnalK) who couldn’t handle the mind-blowing idea. He was getting defensive about something he shouldn’t have had to deal with.
Snarkily “for a new poster?” We get points for seniority here? Sweet. I outrank you. Apologize. Re-open the thread.
Sorry that you disagree with me, but I contend that he was acting troll-ish in his replies and thus I gave a note for it. I would do so again.
Yes, I feel his join date is relevant in the fact that when you’re still new but making many posts or topics that seem to be based around getting reactions (which we have another name for here), it is often a pretty good sign they are only here for one thing only.
You don’t really see that topic as being that way. I did. But even that’s relative since I was fine with keeping it open (all I did was move it to the better forum it was suited for since it seemed more of a humorous and/or parody thread).
And his posts in there seemed to very easily be overly-aggressive as well, especially this post…so I was pretty convinced he wasn’t doing much here but looking to be a snarky poster, although even then I still was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and followed it up with a note to take it to ATMB if he had any issues. The topic would have remained open and he would have still been posting, warning-free, if I had not noticed he admitted to being a sock in his profile.
So again, I would handle it the same way if presented with similar circumstances and no, I’m not going to reopen the thread of a sock. You are free to remake the thread if you wish to continue it, however.
The thread wasn’t closed because the OP was trolling. Whatever the merits of the thread, it was closed because he was a sock. Threads started by socks are closed as a matter of procedure. I have no complaint about that. Why reward a sock by leaving the thread open?
As difficult as this may be for some of my “fans” to believe, I have no problem with the moderation in that thread. Dude was begging for it, and got what he deserved. Well done.
Obv. of the ‘Springtime for Hitler’ school. I liked it, that kind of theme can sometimes lead to a pretty creative thread: Old skool … not that I was around. In the school. Then.