He is taking it up with the moderators, by offering an alternative solution.
No it isn’t. Anyone who thinks it is is lying.
Yes he does. You’re wrong.
No it isn’t.
That’s a lie.
[quote]
If you don’t want threads to get locked on account of hijacking, then please take it up with the moderators.
[quote]
No–YOU take it up with the mods. If you don’t like it, hit the “report this post” button.
No you haven’t. Cite?
Only liars and their supporters believe this sort of thing.*
Oh, and you’re wrong.
Yes it is.
yes they are. you’re a liar if you say otherwise.
No they’re not. It’s obvious and self-evident.
Wrong. This is wrong anywhere in the world and people who believe otherwise are left-handed Anabaptists.
I think you’re just making that up. It’s not true and never has been.
Liar
That’s just wrong. I have an extensive background in that topic or subject and am an expert in this matter. if you think the idea is to keep the thread from getting locked down, you’re wrong. I know. You can’t debate it either.
I suppose you think you are making some kind of point. Mind saying it plainly?
I don’t think posts such as yours should warrant you being banned from the thread–they are easy to read past, and if you meant them seriously then I would know you are a person who makes such posts seriously and could treat you accordingly.
We did, and in retrospect we handled that not so well.
We should have slapped him harder for his individual posts and warned him more swiftly and not jacked around with it for as long as we did. Instead we thought if we tried banning him from giving medical advice he’d be okay otherwise. We were mistaken.
Since then we’ve been really averse to doing this sort of thing, although we’ve used it a few more times with people who were obsessed with certain topics and who just Could Not Stop. So it’s still a tool in the toolbox but one that obviously doesn’t apply to every situation and is used rarely. I think that’s appropriate.
It would be a ton of extra work to have to monitor the posting habits of someone who was asked to leave a thread – not sure I would want to lay that work upon our moderators, they have a lot to say grace over as it is. I would hope if someone exhibited inappropriate behavior in any thread under any circumstances the other participants would report that post. That helps us keep on top of things but even so chasing after miscreants like that … I dunno.
Fenris and Rand Rover – please take your personal disagreement elsewhere. There’s more appropriate places for this tango than About This Message Board.
Of course, this was long before the option of a preliminary suspension prior to a permanent ban, or the present system of warnings, had been instituted. Perhaps a preliminary suspension might have gotten handy’s attention better.
Handy’s basic problem was post-padding. In GQ, he would post the first thing that popped into his head just to get his post count up, regardless of whether it was correct or not. And his answers in medical threads were almost invariably wrong.
Handy was banned long before I became a mod. However, if a similar case happened today - a poster persistently and repeatedly giving wrong or pointless answers in GQ - I would probably give them instructions to either start posting more substantive answers or stop posting in threads they knew nothing about.
It’s good to know that this is still an arrow that mods have in their sheaves. I can understand the reluctance to use it but when a good sound thread is in danger of derailment and the fault can be laid at the door of a single member then they should not hesitate to let fly the Swift Shaft of Just Retribution.
I still say it’s too good for them. Had I my way it woud be the Spell of Forlorn Encystment.
It could be much, much worse.
Lynn Bodoni has submitted an expense form for this.
She ought to get a refund. That looks like a horrible repair job.
We’re looking to install that the next time we do a vBulletin upgrade.
Where was Lynn and her widget this during my [thread=599733] Which of these machete/prybar tools ought I get [/thread] thread?
I have no personal disagreement with Fenris. He and I have barely crossed paths. He just posted a Dio-style “wall of negation” to one of my posts, and I asked what he meant by that.
Geez, I swear this thread is like mod bizarro world.
No, it was THIS one.
I think that Cloud is much, much sexier than Squall ever was, but Squall has the better weapon.
OK, fangirl mode off.
I’m pretty sure that we didn’t have the option of suspension back when I banned handy. We could warn, and then we could ban, nothing in between. And I’m pretty sure that at that time, we didn’t have the option of unbanning, either. It’s been a while, and I might be mistaken. I do think that we probably should have warned him every single time he popped in to give medical misadvice. He was capable of posting thoughtfully and correctly, but as the hummingbird says, he wanted to get a post, any post, in as the first response, and never mind whether or not it was correct.
A few people who were banned back then (Krispy Original, Collounsbury, a few others) were allowed back in after promising to reform, but most of them sooner or later fell into the same behavior as before and were banned a second time.
IIRC, handy, rather than applying for reinstatement, registered under a new username, which pretty much prevented it from being considered.
Does anyone else see the irony that is developing here in this thread?
mmm
Has **pinguin **come up yet in the context of this thread?