Granted. And, as Fenris pointed out, the mods/admins don’t treat unbannings like a popularity contest.
I just think it’s utterly ridiculous to have people jumping all over Joe because of this thread.
I have dissagreed with Joe many times in the past, and I’m sure will continue to in the future, but I haveta say: the response from certain posters has been incredibly out of line and hateful.
I don’t know how I feel about Satan coming back, he was gone by the time I signed up but I read his posts as a lurker and thought he was sometimes witty and sometimes a complete asshole.
I always saw that as a cyclical occurrence with him grendel. Trouble was, toward the end, the cycles seemed to get shorter and closer together…
Having received Satan’s positive contributions personally, I was impressed with Ed Zotti’s action, because without such intervention, Great Debates would have been no more than a pit.
Whether Satan is resurrected or not is of no concern to me, provided that such obnoxious behaviour is not repeated.
I didn’t read the link, Muffin, but I feel confident in assuming that Satan was assholish to you and you have linked to evidence. But I think pretty much everyone has conceded that Satan behaved badly on more than one occasion, hence his banning, hence this thread.
Doesn’t basing the your opinion that he should be reinstated on his history and stature only reinforce that kind of thinking? Furthermore, if you got banned because you acted like you were above the rules, what kind of message does it send if you say “Hey, we’re allowing you back because you were a really valuable asset to the board”?
For the record, I’m not against Satan coming back to the board. And although I don’t agree with how this thread is trying to accomplish it, I’m not against encouraging the staff to reconsider his case. However, I feel strongly that it is not any nonstaffperson’s place to impose criteria for reinstatement or judge that proper penance has been made.
brief historical note–I got here long after Satan, after his banning, and know nothing about his posting history, but I happened to be chatting up Joe_Cool and Jersey Diamond at the Dopefest dinner on Saturday, when Satan came by their secluded little table, and Joe asked about his current status, how he felt about being banned, asked what came of any attempts to get reinstated, etc.
Nice friendly conversation, at the end of which Joe seemed moved to ask, “Isn’t it about time someone reconsidered this banning?” Satan, for his part, seems totally resigned, not encouraging Joe particularly, and Joe seemed to regard Satan’s banning as perhaps too harsh a fate.
Which is to say, having seen it evolve, that I can vouch for Joe’s lack of an ulterior motive. Knowing what (little) I know, I’d have to say that this whole thing came spontaneously out of a very human, very empathetic moment.
Of course, if that moment was staged, Joe_Cool and Satan should be up for an Oscar in Choreography.
Poly wrote:
I can vouch for that much at least.
There was an incident in which a poster violated board rules by misquoting me (rather egregiously) and attributing the misquote to me. I didn’t like what he attributed to me at all, and reported the post. But I also pleaded for leniency on his behalf, since I knew that his intention was satire. I just wanted to be sure everyone else knew that it was satire.
I was told by someone in administration that my plea would have a direct bearing on their consideration of his case.
I read the link. And I’m left assuming that Poly must be right. There must have been a lot more under the hood than met the eye. Because, frankly, Satan’s posts to you in that thread were pretty much along the lines of any DavidB post taken at random — the sort of swoop in and devour kind of thing that is DavidB’s trademark.
Moreover, although Ed said that he called you a weasel, he did no such thing. The difference between calling someone a liar and saying that their post is a lie has been explained to a fare-thee-well. Satan called your back-tracking “weaseling”. He did not call you a weasel.
From Satan:
Practically interchangeable, with respect to style, with something DavidB might have written.
But another poster did indeed directly violate GD rules.
From Badtz Maru:
Gaudere said nothing to Satan, but intercepted Badtz:
Was he banned? I don’t know.
But Poly must have been right. There had to have been a lot more than met the eye. Or not. But if not, then we all are on the precipice of being banned.
Actually Lib he did call Muffin a weasel.
The paragraph after the one you quoted reads :
As to the OP, it all happened long before I joined, and I’m just reading the linked threads for interest. I have no dog in the race, so to speak.
I stand corrected and apologize. Thank you, Goo.
Seems to me there’s a reason why stuff like this should be kept to email between the people involved and the mods and not be the subject of threads, and why some of the posters have said this was a bad idea. At least it’s becoming painfully obvious (to me, anyway) after reading these three pages.
Sorry Joe, I don’t know you from Adam, but I’m firmly in their camp.
This really sucks, people.
As long as we’re parsing, a closer reading of that sentence will reveal that Satan was continuing to use “weasel” as a verb, same as in the first example.
Boy oh boy, I hope you got permission from Satan to post that…seems sort of intrusive, particularly since he hurled personal insults around.
Is this kosher?
I think not.
Woah. that LiveJournal stuff had NO business being posted here…
WOW, posting someone’s LJ is pretty shitty.
Also, in defense of Coldie, I spent a deal time with him at that Dopefest and not once heard him mention Silo. We had a great time!
[Administrator Hat ON]
Ok, I don’t think we need to drag people’s lj to a board thread, particuarly when they can’t defend or explain (although I’d probably consider it fair game if they’d referenced it on this MB).
[Administrator Hat OFF]
I’ll assume you can’t see my post on page 2 of this thread. I can live with that.
If the “serious psychological problems” you refer to are a matter of public record on this board (or elsewhere?) I’m unaware of them.
FWIW though, the much vaunted Satan sig stands in my mind as the sanest three words ever written.
No, I didn’t miss it. I thought it was clear that you were making a sarcastic statement about my unnecessary hyperbolic use of a descriptive qualifier (used myriad times in other situations, especially in the Pit, by myriad others here on this Board) that stood entirely on its own. I got your point, as did everyone else.
But let me ask you a question - do you think a man who claims to be “like a God” in the way which we saw here is a well-balanced person? Seriously? A God? Is no one else having trouble with that? You just can’t un-ring that bell.
Joe, I’m sorry, but if people are going to keep after me, I’m going to have to respond. I tried to walk away, and even after the latest “weasel” creative lie was posted I didn’t comment to call anyone on it. What would you have me do now?