golf clap
Sorry. I mixed up two thoughts. I shouldn’t have quoted you.
Sorry, this is just basic common sense. If someone tells you your posting privileges are in jeopardy because of a rules violation, and you believe that 1) you have been misunderstood; 2) you didn’t intend to violate the rule; 3) you believe the rule is unfair or is being misapplied; or 4) some other mitigating factor, and you care about continuing to post here, it stands to reason that you will either contact the moderators directly, or post an ATMB complaint.
I have been contacted by e-mail or PM by several posters in order to offer an explanation after I have issued a warning, and in a number of cases I have reversed the warning based on that explanation.
The fact is Curtis has never protested or questioned any of his warnings or thread closures in ATMB, although he has has started seven threads here (including this one on having a Hall of Fame for banned members). While I am not certain that he has never contacted another moderator, I do know he has never contacted me with regard to thread closings or warnings.
If you receive a traffic ticket or summons, and don’t contest it, I think it’s a reasonable assumption that you either understand that you are guilty, or that you don’t care about the penalty.
Nonsense. Curtis has five warnings in under four months, which is a record that would merit suspension under any circumstances. The fact that he has received so many warnings is an indicator in and of itself that he is not interested in cooperating. The fact that he hasn’t questioned or protested his warnings either in public or in private just serves to support that conclusion.
The assertion that we’ve suspended Curtis merely because we “dislike” him or because he has been a PITA is also absurd on the face of it. I’m sure any veteran poster here can think of other individuals who have been much more of a PITA to the moderation staff over the course of years, and who are still posting here. (This is not directed at any particular individual.) Curtis has been suspended because of a series of documented rules violations and a failure to modify his posting behavior in response to warnings.
And, I quoted myself there. (and here) That should have been directed at Oakminster. My 2nd to last post should not have been directed at you.
I’m sorry, were you talking to me?
Kinda figured it was something like that. No worries.
I don’t understand what you’re trying to do here - you specifically put “Originally NOT posted by BigT” and used the [**QUOTE] tags on the message board to make it look like you’re quoting, or not quoting, some other post which doesn’t exist. Given that it would be trivial to just click on my post and reply to it, I’m at a loss. Are you saying that’s what you want to say but you’re not, but you really are, but it doesn’t count?
You then say “There. Now I’m gonna take advantage of the button that makes this entire thread go away, so I’m not tempted to respond again. Ciao.” Indeed?
I must say, it’s an unfortunate post. I fear my patience today is short, so I’ll leave it at that.
Come now, surely you don’t believe that. 
Am I the only person who thinks that “Aspies” sounds like you’re talking about breed of dog?
Yes you are.
No, you’re not.
An aside: one thing that I do give Curtis credit for is starting the Presidential Elimination Game. It’s really improved my experience of the boards, and it would be nice if he could be around for the finale. JMHO.
Obviously. Thankfully.
Am I the only one honest enough to admit that, ages or “disorders” be damned, I’m happy that Curtis Lemay isn’t posting here anymore because I didn’t like his posts? I don’t believe for one single second that I’m the only one.
Don’t try to hide behind the “ethics of the board,” ok? You didn’t like him, I didn’t like him, he’s gone now, we’re happy. What’s the problem?
I think your attitude is both disturbing and imperious. Shall we have referendums to eliminate the “undesirables”? I’m sure you aren’t the only one, but fortunately, this board isn’t (yet) a mutual admiration society composed of a bunch of people who like reading each other’s posts.
Rules are there to make things fair. If you think there should be rules, then the rules should be followed by both posters and moderators. If you want to get rid of the bad people, then why not just eliminate the rules entirely?
Stupid button doesn’t keep it from showing up on the front page. I probably shouldn’t respond, but it bothers me that you find it so “unfortunate.”
It was just a colorful flourish to indicate that, although I used the quote tags (to separate it out from my response to Oakminster), it had not actually been posted anywhere before.
I really want to clarify why I decided to include it, but my OCD is making it really hard. I guess I’ll just put the whole story in the following spoiler.
[spoiler]Here’s all that happened. I don’t know if it will help you understand or not. I’m not going to do much proofreading for clarity or brevity.
I was composing a response to your post. It took me a few hours. I realized that, if I kept on responding, I was going to be spending similar amounts of time on every response. So instead of actually using that post, I wrote the one saying I was “throwing in the towel.”
I decided to take one last look into the thread to see if there was anyone who thought like I did. Guin had responded in a way that I thought took advantage of the fact I was gone. So I felt the need to respond. Then I stumbled upon Oakminster’s post. Since I felt like I was the only one arguing in this thread, I was worried I was on that list, which would mean that my opinions were essentially going to be ignored from now on. (Oakminster cleared that up in a PM.)
I still had my response to you open. It bugged the crap out of me that I had spent so much time on a response for it not to be heard. I hoped there were things in it that might be useful to understand my position. (As Guin sure didn’t seem to get it.) So I decided, on a whim, to put it in my last post. I did not want to go back and proofread, as I had spent too much time on this subject already. I wanted to separate it out from my actual response to Oakminster, so I put it in quote tags. I didn’t want it to look like I was actually quoting someone, and I thought I’d be clever and show that the way I did. I guess it was unclear.[/spoiler]
Think what you want about me and my attitude.
Should we hold a referendum? Actually, that’s quite a good idea. If the board officially"votes against" a particular user then they should be banned. If it happens to me I’ll accept my fate, so should Curtis. So should you.
This is the type of response that makes me question if you guys are truly giving allowances for the disorder. Why would you expect someone with Asperger’s to have “common sense”? Heck, even when I was Curtis’s age, I wouldn’t have thought it okay to try and explain something to an authority figure. At that age I was taught that you’re supposed to accept your punishment without question. I would probably apologize, but that’s something I don’t see people with Asperger’s do a lot of, either.
I just don’t think you should use his lack of correspondence to make your decision. Just stick with the facts. He violated a few rules. To me, he seemed to have learned from each violation (as he didn’t repeat them) besides the “too many threads” one, but you guys seem to disagree.
To me, the whole Wikipedia vandalism thing should not even be a warnable offense. It’s one of those things that, if another poster were to have put up that poll, I wouldn’t expect anything to have happened at all. This is why I came to the conclusion that Curtis was being banned for who he is, and not what he did.
BTW, the only time that I discussed Asperger’s with you prior to this thread was when you closed a poll by Curtis that involved, um, bathroom hygiene. A particular thing he said was quite gross, and you said something along the lines of “Think before you post.” I argued that, if he had Asperger’s as he claimed, he likely did think about it, and didn’t realize it would be perceived as gross. (I wish I’d also mentioned that that particular method of bathroom hygiene is practiced in the Middle East, and actually makes some logical sense that it might be practiced by someone on the Dope.) The fact that this was not self-evident to you indicated to me that you did not understand the disorder.
You’re trying to argue for leniency based on a disorder you don’t even know he had, don’t forget.
That’s a pretty sad stance. I’m glad you aren’t in charge.
This is what makes me so insane about all this. The guy claimed he had it. His behavior is consistent with it. But you guys want to be paranoid about it.
You guys have had people that have faked it. I get it. But why not LEARN from that? Instead of going around assuming that everyone you don’t like is lying (like I’ve seen on certain other boards), LEARN about what it takes to have a mental disorder, and LEARN to spot flaws in the story.
No one has brought a single shred of evidence that Curtis is faking, but you guys keep on wanting to assume the possibility. If you have no evidence, shut up.