# So...wait...exactly was Seven banned/suspended for? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 31, 2009, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930 "2009-07-31T23:44:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/21 "2009-08-01T01:35:35Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > I concur. > > There are plenty of threads where mods have explained, in detail, numerous times why action was taken. I suggest you do your homework and go find out instead of expecting people to once again explain things. Except that the only mod really explaining anything at all is Marley. > [@](#): > > And pressing the issue isn’t likely to yield any more substantial answers. > > It’s really time to let it go. You’re probably right, and I’ve given the same advice. But Fenris, as much as we (for some reason that’s a mystery to me) don’t get along, has every right as a poster to ask questions until he gets answers that he believes are comprehensible. “Let it go” works fine in theory, but when you’re honestly confused, or you truly feel like the responses are unacceptable, then he should express himself even if no one will do anything about it — for posterity, if nothing else, so that we have record of the fact that a mod’s answer(s) came across as ambiguous or even confusing. ---
**Author:** ![Who\_me\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/958977/32.png) [@Who\_me\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Who_me_1)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/22 "2009-08-01T01:37:26Z")
I agree. **Seven** apparently got 2 warnings (he actually had a third that was discovered after the original banning), then he posted using the PM quote and posted the snarkpit stuff and got banned (later changed to a suspension). It seems like neither of the last two items were actually against the rules. The question **Fenris** is trying to get an answer for is, “What action caused the banning/suspension.” **Marley23** has taken up the task, but I’m more confused about the issue now than I was to start with. And, as for me, this will probably be my last post in this series of threads on the subject. I will continue to read them hoping for enlightenment. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/23 "2009-08-01T01:39:05Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > … but when you’re honestly confused, … I do not believe that **Fenris** , et al, is (are) honestly confused. I believe that he (they) do find the answers unacceptable. Tough. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/24 "2009-08-01T01:39:56Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Nonsense. This thread is merely another attempt to obfuscate the issue, despite your disingenuous attempt to act as if you are merely seeking clarification. Your question is perfectly appropriate in one of the existing threads; you’re simply attention whoring by starting a new thread But what does that have to do with your “silence=support for Seven” claim? > [@](#): > > **Seven** broke one simple rule: Don’t be a jerk. You and your ilk are trying to codify “Don’t be a jerk,” and it can’t be done. Our opinion differs. > [@](#): > > I suggest that if you don’t care for the way the rule is interpreted here, that you find another message board to hang out on, one which, perhaps, has different rules. Once again you demonstrate the social and communication skills that made your tenure as mod here what it was. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/25 "2009-08-01T01:40:27Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Nonsense. This thread is merely another attempt to obfuscate the issue, despite your disingenuous attempt to act as if you are merely seeking clarification. Your question is perfectly appropriate in one of the existing threads; you’re simply attention whoring by starting a new thread L oh fucking L! You have GOT to be joking. His question is the question that is not being answered to his satisfaction. That does not make him a whore of any kind, attention or otherwise. > [@](#): > > **Seven** broke one simple rule: Don’t be a jerk. You and your ilk are trying to codify “Don’t be a jerk,” and it can’t be done. People are just trying to find out what a jerk IS. What’s the fucking definition? Is it someone who irritates a mod? Is it someone who irritates other posters? What is it? > [@](#): > > I suggest that if you don’t care for the way the rule is interpreted here, that you find another message board to hang out on, one which, perhaps, has different rules. Jees, Frank. Instead of America Love It Or Leave It, folks are just trying to make the board they love most more amenable to them. Your message is the same one they used to give people who fought for their civil rights. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/26 "2009-08-01T01:43:25Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > I do not believe that **Fenris** , et al, is (are) honestly confused. I believe that he (they) do find the answers unacceptable. Tough. Well played sir–from your first failed attempt to hijack with the "silence=support for Seven’ foray into your less articulate anger phase, you’ve successfully hijacked this thread until a mod tells you to stop. That said, I think most mods here will tell you to stop eventually and your rants will appear even more foolish than they already do. So, have fun. I know I will.😃 ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/27 "2009-08-01T01:49:11Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > People are just trying to find out what a jerk IS. Oh, for pete’s sake, **Liberal** , we’ve got ten years of history as to what a jerk is. **Fenris** , I see no reason whatsoever why my responses in this thread are any more inappropriate than you starting a new thread on a subject which is already being discussed to death in other threads. Please, in small words, and without too many commas, explain to me why your OP would not have been better served as a post in one of the other existing threads discussing the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/28 "2009-08-01T01:55:01Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Oh, for pete’s sake, **Liberal** , we’ve got ten years of history as to what a jerk is. And none of it involves rules like "It’s ok to talk about the Snarkpit as long as you don’t start an OP with it. > [@](#): > > **Fenris** , I see no reason whatsoever why my responses in this thread are any more inappropriate than you starting a new thread on a subject which is already being discussed to death in other threads. Because hijacking is against the rules in ATMB (and apparently GD) while opening what some people consider new threads on aspects of existing topics _is_ legal. > [@](#): > > Please, in small words, and without too many commas, explain to me why your OP would not have been better served as a post in one of the other existing threads discussing the subject. Because every other thread involves changing definitions/reasons for why Seven was banned. If we can get a concrete answer “He was a jerk for doing A/B/C”, it then narrows the scope of the debate in all the others and prevents foolish answers like “He violated copyright laws” and “Well, even though though the rules state that it’s ok to talk about the snarkpit but not link to it, it’s also not ok to make the snarkpit the OP of a thread.” To paraphrase Liberal, let’s nail down our definitions before we debate. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/29 "2009-08-01T01:57:19Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Oh, for pete’s sake, **Liberal** , we’ve got ten years of history as to what a jerk is. If it were that obvious, you wouldn’t have four or five or however many threads trying to pin down the actual trigger for **Seven** ’s banninating. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/30 "2009-08-01T02:00:05Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Oh, for pete’s sake, **Liberal** , we’ve got ten years of history as to what a jerk is. Yes, that’s right. And it’s rather the point. We have ten years of history as to what a jerk is, and now suddenly, it appears that a jerk is something else. THAT’s why people are confused. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/31 "2009-08-01T02:06:40Z")
Well, the rule used to be, don’t talk about the Snarkpit at all. That’s changed. > [@Fenris](#): > > Because hijacking is against the rules in ATMB (and apparently GD) while opening what some people consider extraneous threads is legal. Well, we’ll see, shan’t we? I’m still unclear as to how I am hijacking your extraneous thread. I’ll also note that closing duplicate threads has been a common occurence ever since I joined the board. ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/32 "2009-08-01T02:07:45Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > If it were that obvious, you wouldn’t have four or five or however many threads trying to pin down the actual trigger for **Seven** ’s banninating. Well, that’s one explanation. Another as likely explanation is that some folks haven’t learned to let things go when it becomes clear that more substantial questions won’t be forthcoming. ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/33 "2009-08-01T02:10:06Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Well, we’ll see, shan’t we? I’m still unclear as to how I am hijacking your extraneous thread By refusing to play ball and have yet another discussion about it when there are other perfectly good threads to continue the discussion in? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/34 "2009-08-01T02:11:00Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Yes, that’s right. And it’s rather the point. We have ten years of history as to what a jerk is, and now suddenly, it appears that a jerk is something else. THAT’s why people are confused. OK, how do you, after ten years here, see that **Seven** differs from such as **Collounsbury** and **andrewdt85**? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/35 "2009-08-01T02:12:56Z")
:: shrug :: That’s fine. You haven’t addressed my question about your first objection to my thread: that somehow this thread upset you because someone, somewhere had implied that silence equals support for Seven. You also haven’t addressed that “Being a jerk” has never, to date, included stuff like “Mentioning the snarkpit in an OP is forbidden”. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/36 "2009-08-01T02:15:00Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > Well, that’s one explanation. > > Another as likely explanation is that some folks haven’t learned to let things go when it becomes clear that more substantial questions won’t be forthcoming. Here’s a cushion for your forehead so you don’t injure yourself kowtowing. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/37 "2009-08-01T02:15:03Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > OK, how do you, after ten years here, see that **Seven** differs from such as **Collounsbury** and **andrewdt85**? Not to speak for Liberal, but Collounsbury was all over GD tossing around personal insults. Andrewdt85 (as far as I know) started 30 or 40 useless threads to fight with mods. (I missed most of the Andrew thing) Seven debated mods in about 5 threads. And generally debated points in depth. I’m wondering what you see that they have in common. ---
**Author:** ![HongKongFooey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c4cdca/32.png) [@HongKongFooey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HongKongFooey)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/38 "2009-08-01T02:16:01Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Well, we’ll see, shan’t we? I’m still unclear as to how I am hijacking your extraneous thread. Let’s put it in simple terms then. Have you done anything in this thread to answer the question posed in the OP or further the discussion? No, you haven’t. You don’t agree, fine, fine, here’s your cookie. > [@tacoloco](#): > > Well, that’s one explanation. > > Another as likely explanation is that some folks haven’t learned to let things go when it becomes clear that more substantial questions won’t be forthcoming. Why would people continue to push for answers? There are a zillion other boards on the internet but we all like this one, or at least want to like it. The reason there aren’t more substantial answers is because there aren’t any but people are still pushing because they sincerely want to make this a better place. You may not believe that but it’s true. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/39 "2009-08-01T02:18:52Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > That’s fine. You haven’t addressed my question about your first objection to my thread: that somehow this thread upset you because someone, somewhere had implied that silence equals support for Seven. Really? You must not read my response to you then. > [@](#): > > You also haven’t addressed that “Being a jerk” has never, to date, included stuff like “Mentioning the snarkpit in an OP is forbidden”. Nor must you have read my post where I mentioned that “being a jerk” cannot be codified. Or do you expect the rules to specifically mention every single one of the millions of possible ways in which a poster can be a jerk? ---
**Author:** ![HongKongFooey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c4cdca/32.png) [@HongKongFooey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HongKongFooey)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2009, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930/40 "2009-08-01T02:19:20Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > By refusing to play ball and have yet another discussion about it when there are other perfectly good threads to continue the discussion in? The funny thing about threads you don’t like is you can choose not to post in them. If no one is interested they fall off the page in short order. What are you doing to further the discussion here? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wait-exactly-was-seven-banned-suspended-for/504930.md?page=3)