And…?
Since when are we all of one mind about much of anything? So there’s some bitching and moaning…what else is new? We can take it, we do every day.
wring: FWIW, Silo was not a longtime poster when he was initially banned; I think it took him only a few weeks, maybe a month, to get kicked off the first time.
Once he was unbanned, he was a poster in good standing for a bit over a year before he was banned again.
It certainly appears to me that the board administration has been gradually tightening the rules of conduct for some time - for nearly the duration of the board, really. This isn’t a criticism; in fact, I think it’s a good thing. But it would explain why Wildest Bill was cut less slack than Satan was.
Yeah, but for all practical purposes it’s being cast out of a community, in a way that getting kicked out of your favorite bar isn’t. That’s a pretty serious business. And I have to agree with Stoid that, for that reason, the sentiment of that community should count for something on the scales.
Stoid:
I know this is moving fast and all, so you might have missed it. But I think that was a bit unfair, after Una’s thoughtful response to my post.
Arnold: Sure, people might say that. But they might say that when you ban someone the first time, too - an event that naturally happens far more frequently.
But if he were to get banned again, I think that most people here, even those who were in his corner, are going to have the sense to say, “Look, when they let him back onto the board, he knew he was going to have to be a model citizen. And he was a dick anyway. Good riddance.”
Anyhow, since you say he hasn’t formally asked for reinstatement, I’ll shut up now until he does.
thanks RT I wasn’t around for Silo’s first incarnation. but the point was, I think, the same. I agree w/your point that they seem to be tightening up and less apt to give multiple chances.
Ogre - To the best of my recollection, I never interacted w/Satan - he posted often in religion threads, which I avoid generally. So, your assumption about those not in favor having had a grudge to begin with is wrong at least in my case. I did post in his banning thread that I agreed that he’d been warned over and over and it wasn’t a surprise. If memory serves, I said much the same re: Collunsbury
Stoid - arguing is one thing. Polarizing is another. The threads I mentioned weren’t just the usual round of “Gore won” “No he didn’t” stuff that happens daily. Those threads were ugly, folks left because of them.
wring - I understand that. If you didn’t interact with him, then it can safely be said that I am not talking about you. Thus, no false assumption…I simply didn’t mean you.
If you’re objecting to Satan’s reinstatement on grounds of principle and board rules, I can respect that. There are some others whom I’d expect to object based on personal experience.
I’m just saying that I think he deserves a second chance, and that I like this thread. It’s this kind of thing that makes SDMB a true community and not just a disparate group of people posting random messages.
Oh, and about the blank response…sorry. Forget it. I changed my mind about the response, but didn’t catch it in time.
Ha! I remember the first time I saw DDG use the f-word, lo these many months ago. You go, Duckie! 
As for the OP, that’s up to the staff, isn’t it? The original decision was not made lightly, but it was made quite correctly, IMHO. Why start a public campaign for them to bring back the headaches they got rid of so long ago?
Comparing being banned from the SDMB to prison.
Wow. That’s some unique sense of … something.
Instead of reading this post, please scroll up 7 posts and read Ogre’s first one in this thread over again.
I don’t think that I did. My intent anyhow, was to suggest that, for all that we enjoy the SDMB, for all that there’s a sense of community and so on, being banned from it, really at the end of the day, means simply that you’re not able to post at a single message board. Satan still can (and probably does) stay in touch with friends he met here. He still can (and apparently does) go to dopefests. He still can (and possibly does) read the boards. He can (and probably does) post at other message boards.
Would I like being banned? Nope. That’s probably why I’ve managed to go for over 2 years w/o being yelled at by the staff here. (well, there was that one comment that Manny made to me once. damn him… 
).
So, when an adult continues to act in a manner that he has been promised will result in certain consequences, barring a medical issue (such as addiction), I gotta go with “gee, at some level, this is what they’ve decided to do”.
Oh look, I see now that Stoid disagrees with me. Fascinating, since she chose to ignore so many direct responses of mine to the outlandish shit spouted on this Board, that she chose now to make a side-comment towards me. I think the reason must be at least as obvious as my ire.
Yes, I have ire. Are you saying it is without cause or invalid? I expect you to answer fully and completely, Stoid, and present proof as to why you think it would be without cause or invalid, if you feel that way.
My objection to this thread was not about that, and even if it had been, thankfully, my ire and my personal opinions have ab-so-fucking-lutely nothing to do with SDMB Staff actions. This isn’t a Spuffy Board, where people get voted in or out because of their cliquishness or “kewlness”, thank God. I do believe Joe_Cool’s heart is in the right place, and I can recognize that, even though I disagree with this action.
The point people are trying to make here is towfold:
- How requests like this should be handled, especially for a “controversial” personage or topic.
- The validity of “rallying posts and threads” and the use of them to (potentially) attempt to influence SDMB Staff action.
Followed by this additional point:
3) If “rallying posts and threads” are allowed, then are “rallying AGAINST posts and threads allowed”? This is why I used the example of how some (myself) might have ire and use it to that end, if such were allowed.
Quite simply - I feel that the scenario above would be destructive and divisive, and would tear the Board apart. Does this need any further explanation, Stoid? Because even my fucking cat understands it.
Even if threads of this sort were allowed, or are allowed, you certainly won’t see me starting a thread against Satan or his reinstatement. It’s not up to me. I may or may not weigh in privately via e-mail to the Administration, but if so, that’s between me and the SDMB Staff.
Nope, you didn’t miss that part of the agreement. Seems like you missed the part where you can get responses you don’t agree with though. I won’t defend the snarkiness that’s been thrown out, but did you actually think there wouldn’t be any type of criticism?
I didn’t admit I killed that guy in Reno, until the police knocked on my door. 
RT wrote:
Then why aren’t they saying that now?
Because “they” (meaning “I”…I presume to speak for no one else, but there appear to be some that agree) think he’s done his penance and it’s time to forgive and try again. I, for one, miss his voice.
Can you edit your profile after you’re banned? Just wondering 'cause Satan’s aim handle is listed as ‘Coldfire is a Nazi’ and his biography says ‘Avoid assholes like the above named.’
I’m sure he doesn’t really hate coldie (I sure hope not after almost two years :eek:.) and of course I don’t either but it just sounds funny. Reminds me of something Calvin (of Calvin and Hobbes fame) would say/do :).
No, you cannot edit it after banning. SOP on most Boards is to clear all personal info, leaving it as blank as possible. On some Boards, they even run an SQL script to purge all reference to the offender as well, including all of their posts. Performing a “Member-ectomy”, as I call it.
On some Boards…
Nope, I didn’t miss that part at all. I fully expected a lively conversation and plenty of opposition. However, I didn’t expect to have to “fuck myself” just for suggesting that a year and a half might be enough time for an adult to get himself together and learn his lesson. And I didn’t expect to be called names for suggesting that it might be time to let a worthwhile contributor back onto the board.
Was it just to watch him die?
Anthracite:
You make some good points. This thread might have been improper. If it is, I apologize to the staff for opening it. But I honestly think this topic deserves discussion - if not by the powers that be, then at least in their view. I’m a little distressed by all the people saying “well, of course they made the right decision as usual…” because it’s not all that obvious. I don’t disagree that the initial action was kosher, but I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that there were some personal grudges playing a part in the situation.
However, the staff did provide a forum for us to question and discuss their decisions, and I am taking them up on the offer. I did not post this in bad faith, as I’m sure you know, and I certainly didn’t intend this to be a moderator (or anybody) flame-fest. I realize that there are some strong feelings on both sides of the discussion, and I think it’s a good thing to get them out in the open. Yes he acted inappropriately a number of times. But then so have innumerable other posters, not to mention even some of the staff from time to time. My opinion, not being privy to the staff discussions, is that it’s likely that he gets special treatment due to the fact that much of his ire was directed at certain of the moderators, unlike kirkland1244 and collounsbury, for example (both of whom were unbanned and given a second chance), who were certainly more hateful overall, but spewed it at the peasantry, rather than the nobility.
But again, that’s just my relatively uninformed opinion.
And finally…
Holy cow!
::scrambling around to find a marker::
That would have been me. And it’s really not so odd:
Prison = punishment for bad behavior.
Banning = punishment for bad behavior.
actually if that was the case, then it’s entirelly an appropriate response.
The mods (unpaid) are here to enforce the rules. Someone getting in their face being a jerk, should be handled differently and more seriously than some one being a jerk to others here.
it happens in real life all the time. Make a casual threat to a neighbor and you might get a court order to leave them alone. Make a casual threat to the President, you can be charged with a felony.
A kid at school taunting another student will get pulled aside perhaps and ‘talked to’. A kid at school taunting the school officials will get much more serious consequences.
Well, Minty, you’re a lawyer. You work in an environment where the ultimate arbitration is the decision of either one man or a small group of men, yes?
When you’re in court, presenting a case, do you just sit back and say, “Well, I’m not going to say anything, because it’s for the judge to decide”?
Or do you present a case to the judge (or jury) to try to sway them to your point of view?
Methinks that’s what Joe’s doing here.
???
Actually, Anthracite, I’ve responded to things you’ve posted a number of times, and until a recent contribution you made to a thread of mine, I was pretty convinced I was one of the “dozen or so” (if I recall correctly), who live on your ignore list. So in other words… “huh?”
To whom? Do you imagine that your 2 year old squabbles with someone are burned on our collective consciousness for some reason?
Well, let’s see, I expect ice cream and cake. Will you be providing it?
I haven’t a clue what your problem with Satan is, Anthracite, and honestly couldn’t possibly care less if I tried. I have observed that you have a lot of problems with a lot of people; color me unsurprised that Satan is among them.
Sure. Most recently, see the Collounsbury thread that happened just a week or two before he was actually banned. See the daily “pittings” of dozens and dozens of posters. That doesn’t seem to get you in such a tizzy…why do you become so enraged at a post calling for forgiveness?
Gosh, I disagree Anthracite…can ya deal?