Lekatt banned? Really?

So Tom pulled the plug on Lekatt.

You know, for people who had no (more) tolerance for him, all they [del]have[/del] had to do is not open his threads or take him on in argument. But banning him? There are a dozen posters who are consistently bigger jerks than I assume Tom and the mods felt Lekatt was.

The bottom line is that he was banned because he was being willfully ignorant. But how does banning him, for that, help the overall status of the Board? It doesn’t. All it does is to set a precedent that says ‘if we don’t like the style of your debate, and you don’t change it when we tell you to, you’re gone’.

I’d much rather just ignore posters like Lekatt than have them banned. He was civil, sincere, and, yes, (wilfully) ignorant. But not bannable.

(BTW, if I have missed some egregious offence(s) that he committed (those that Tom cited sure weren’t, IMO), please let me know - I might then retract this OP)

I was very underwhelmed by the severity of his recent ‘offenses’. Very disappointed how many quirky posters are banned.

Evidence indicates he hasn’t really changed his posting style in 11 years.

In other words, no reason to ban him now.

I never paid much attention to him but one of the things he was warned about ( more than once) was using his own blog for a cite. it could be claimed he was trying to drive traffic there.

That’s one of the things that got Marxxx in hot water.

He was suspended back in 2010, after four warnings (mostly for personal insults) in a month. He basically left, and did not post until March of this year. He’s then piled up four warnings (basically for the same offense.)

The Moderators did discuss this, saw no change in behavior, and decided to drop the axe.

Please note: we do not like threads or discussions about the departed, because they can’t respond to defend themselves. I’m going to leave this open for a day or so, but then it will be closed.

Also, lekatt: if you are reading this, and want to protest or discuss, please do NOT set up a sock puppet. That will cut the legs off any arguments you want to make. Instead, contact one of the admins in email. (NOTE: The same applies to anyone banned or suspended who thinks they would like another chance, etc. Using a sock to post your arguments is dooming the arguments before you say a word.)

With respect, only one of the warnings was for something that was remotely insulting (and actually, I’d characterize it as annoying). Dex: please take another look at the ban thread: I think he was warned essentially for persistently disregarding moderator instructions. lekatt banned - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board

I lodge no complaint. I perceive tightened standards. I request that Jonathan Chance share his moderator philosophy in a few months. I acknowledge that JC was not the only guy issuing warnings and that lekatt was a long time problem poster.

So people are being banned just for being stupid and repetitive now?:frowning: I looked at the thread announcing his banning and linking to his recent warnings. There is nothing offensive there at all, not in the least. The couple of links to his own blog were topic appropriate, providing access long lists of further links to relevant sites. That does not seem inappropriate to me. If he has been randomly linking to largely irrelevant stuff on his blog, that woul d be another matter, but that is not what it looks like to me. He is just saving time and avoiding double-posting links.

I do not see why being impervious to rational argument should be a bannable offense. He is easy enough to ignore.

I have to agree with the others. I don’t see him as having committed ban-able offences.

We always appreciate posters reporting these people. Help us out.

I’m not familiar with the history leading to this banning, but wouldn’t being willfully ignorant make him the opposition for this board?

It was worse than being a willful ignorant, he was **advertising **for his ignorant publication.

The thing is that he also had a website/blog to sell his or his group’s books and the last warning was for linking once again to that and to one of his own articles in that blog as if that was supporting evidence of what he was claiming and not mentioning to the readers that it was his own site and information.

He had been warned specifically to not pull that stunt again.

I’ve mostly dealt with him outside of GD which makes it feel like banning a puppy to me. But if racking up 4 warnings for doing the same thing you were suspended for isn’t grounds for a banning I don’t know what is.

Very much agree. The warnings are coming fast and furious lately and I don’t think many of them were deserved.

Meh. No loss.

I went back and read parts of the threads that were referenced, and I noticed another poster, jsutter, had BANNED under his name. So I read through his posts, and there’s no indication of any warnings or even bad behavior. Other than his annoying habit of throwing “Aloha” or “Mahalo” into every post (I’d warn him for that, but then anyone who closes their posts with “Regards” would be in trouble, too).

Truth is . . . I can’t.

What constitutes being a “jerk” to me is, evidently, not a definition shared by TPTB. And, nor should it be.

Just because I find the latest racist to be de facto a jerk, doesn’t make him a jerk. In part, that’s what I was getting at in my OP - just because a poster is ignorant doesn’t make him reportable, let alone bannable.

(To be clear, when I said there were “a dozen posters” who were bigger jerks, I was being hyperbolic.)

Glad to see I am not alone in thinking this was an unnecessary banning. We sure are getting awfully vanilla lately.

Well, everyone will have their own definition. But remember, a report is just that: a report. Just a note to the moderators of that forum that something’s worth checking out. It doesn’t mean there’ll be action if the moderator’s disagree. Nor does it always lead to a warning if there is action.

But our jobs would be more straightforward if more people chose to report posts they thought crossed a line.

Missed the edit window to mention that the other effect of reading all those threads was that I came to understand Lekatt’s banning. He was repeatedly warned, not just for linking or for his style of arguing, but continually making his “arguments” nothing more than spouting woo, judging everyone else, and witnessing. Other posters would try to get him to debate honestly and he’d just crank out more platitudes instead of giving real answers.