I agree. (And have said similar things several times.) Reasons for bannings should not be kept secret, imho.
In this case, he was warned for threatening (yeah, yeah, I know) a Doper, and he behaved in a very ass holish manner for several days straight.
How bizarre. Block his e-mail addy. Seriously.
C’mon lissener, what is your bizarre obsession with nonpolar? He was being a jerk, it’s that simple. From the moment he stepped foot on the board until his last post. That’s why the basic rule is “Don’t be a jerk.” To allow for people like him.
I’ll be surprised if a mod pops in here and says anything different.
Which they do. In high profile bannings, December’s for instance, or Collounsbury’s, mods have actively participated in the quite lengthy and heated threads about those bannings. This one? Pshaw. He contributed nothing except a heat rash in my armpit.
Dude, you’re far more emotionally involved in this than I am. I expressed an idle curiosity, period. How the fuck is that a bizarre obsession? He WAS a jerk, but that rule sucks to, because it’s so vague and subjective. It’s like, “You will be executed for murder, rape, or pissing off the emperor.”
Well, you’re doing nothing in this thread except questioning his banning, regardless of the fact that you are a non-emotionally involved lone ranger here. Seriously, is everybody else wrong?
It’s supposed to be subjective, and you should know why by now.
I tried to objectively measure how much my life would be diminished by nonpolar’s banning but I couldn’t afford to rent an electron microscope.
Trust me hon, I’m not emotionally involved. And I’m not so much questioning his banning. I was mildly curious that there was no final “banning” post from a mod, and from there it became a more general discussion about the mystery surrounding the secret act of banning. I was no longer thinking specifically of nonpolar; just discoursing on the policies and their often capricious use.
‘Capricious’ use? Are you high? nonpolar is running around the boards, acting like a retard, and was warned several times. Given the similiarities between yourself and nonpolar, I understand why you are so concerned, but unless the mods are warning you, you probably aren’t on the shortlist to get banned.
As I already pointed out, my use of the word “capricious” was in the second stage of this discussion, which was not about nonpolar but about general mod policy.
What I was getting at is that it would be extremely unlikely for a Mod to acknowlege a banning was due to personal issues.
Wow, Jeff, I continue to be astonished at your capacity for self-delusion and dishonesty. The quoted post was not about a mod’s subjectivity, it was about your prediction of how I would behave in a situation that didn’t exist. You have not maintained the deniability that you’ve convinced yourself you’ve so brilliantly done. You’re not the master of the veiled insult you think you are; you pretty much suck at the whole veiling thing.
“Dude” was more correct than “hon.”
Then perhaps you could start a new thread about that. It’s been a while since banning in general was discussed. Are we due? Your discoursing in this thread makes it appear that you are defending this particular banee.
Sorry; but you were simply mistaken about my motivations, such as they were, in this thread. I apologize to the extent that I was unclear.
lissener, we’ve explained the banning process before but once again…
There it is. The process isn’t perfect and we’ve never claimed it to be so. But it’s as fundamentally fair, responsive and flexible as we’ve been able to figure out.
You’re questioning the process, and that’s fine. We bend over backwards to house outspoken eccentrics and even borderline wackos as long as they make an attempt at responsible communication. But nobody’s been banned capriciously, out of the blue. If anything, we’re the final filters on the feedback system.
Veb
Thank you. However, I still think it would be helpful to post a locked announcement about each banning with a one sentence explanation. This strikes me as much more productive than the current “disappeared into the darkness” approach.
Better yet, how about a simple attachment to their profile? Perhaps w/ a link to any specific offenses? No need to waste extra space.
Then again, I’m not that worried about it myself. I’ve seen a lot come and go. Practically everytime they’ve received numerous warnings. The only time I recall any bannings w/out provocation were socks and ad posts etc. porn links …obvious violations.
I think the good side of nonpolar wanted to challenge the cosy nature of some of the chat on this site, and to puncture the pomposity and pretension of some. He wanted to throw down the gauntlet and say 'I’m not waiting two years till I’m accepted - you get me straight up right now". Sadly, he didn’t have much to give. The gauntlet was a bit threadbare.
The other side wanted lots of attention.
Being a troublemaker and rabble-rouser can be highly entertaining if you’ve got the wit to make your barbs memorable. Nonpolar’s intellectual contribution was the equivalent of a six year-old calling everyone he didn’t like a “poopy-head!”
Had the guy been capable of good sarcasm and sly wit, he’d likely still be around, as are our many wiseguy members.
We have wiseguy members?
Damn, now I’m scared. Please don’t kill me, Vinny!