Just Curious

[PocketRocket]

I see he/she got banned.

I tried a search of MIRROR's posts over the past week.

While a lot of them were, well, peculiar, I didn't see anything particularly offensive or anything.

I'm sort of curious as to why MIRROR got the axe.

Can anybody point me to the post which became the straw that broke the camel's back???

[newbie]

I see he/she got banned.

I tried a search of MIRROR's posts over the past week.

While a lot of them were, well, peculiar, I didn't see anything particularly offensive or anything.

I'm sort of curious as to why MIRROR got the axe.

Can anybody point me to the post which became the straw that broke the camel's back???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it was the trolling and flaming that got him in trouble. Greg said he was going to clean house and it doesn't surprise me. While I enjoyed some of his posts, I guess he stepped over the line a little too often.

[Cartman]

Can anybody point me to the post which became the straw that broke the camel's back???

Go look at the German elections thread.

[Argus]

I see he/she got banned.

I tried a search of MIRROR's posts over the past week.

While a lot of them were, well, peculiar, I didn't see anything particularly offensive or anything.

I'm sort of curious as to why MIRROR got the axe.

Can anybody point me to the post which became the straw that broke the camel's back???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it was the trolling and flaming that got him in trouble. Greg said he was going to clean house and it doesn't surprise me. While I enjoyed some of his posts, I guess he stepped over the line a little too often.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I too, am unsurprised. When I read Greg's post Mirror was among the first I suspected would go. While he wasn't as bad as others in any particular post the sheer weight of his postings, many of which went well across the line Greg earlier established, could have done him in. In other words, it quite possibly wasn't one post or one thread but just that Greg had had enough.

[Riverwind]

Can anybody point me to the post which became the straw that broke the camel's back???

Could have been banned for repeately ignoring copyright rules.

[Toro]

I didn't think Mirror was bad at all.

[August1991]

I didn't think Mirror was bad at all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree Toro. I looked through the German thread and saw nothing exceptional. Did I miss something?

[theloniusfleabag]

I am inclined to agree with Argus,

While he wasn't as bad as others in any particular post the sheer weight of his postings, many of which went well across the line Greg earlier established, could have done him in. In other words, it quite possibly wasn't one post or one thread but just that Greg had had enough.

I would also suspect that Greg offered him one or several warnings, and that no change was effected. There are a couple of other posters that continue to use vitriol instead of debate, and epithets instead of adjectives, so I hope Greg continues with this course, and soon.

[PocketRocket]

I saw what was posted in teh "German" thread, and just about everything else MIRROR posted in the past 3 or 4 days.

Didn't see anything that I would have taken him out for.

But then it's not my forum.

I did, however, see people directly addressed as morons, asses and several other direct insults.

To my mind, it kind of muddies the waters a bit.

Oh well. Life goes on.

[I Miss Trudeau]

I saw what was posted in teh "German" thread, and just about everything else MIRROR posted in the past 3 or 4 days.

Didn't see anything that I would have taken him out for.

But then it's not my forum.

I did, however, see people directly addressed as morons, asses and several other direct insults.

To my mind, it kind of muddies the waters a bit.

Oh well. Life goes on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another incomprehensible move by Greg. I simply cannot comprehend how Mirror or the Sweal were worse, in any way, than a fair number of people who seem to have free reign on this site.

Is Greg really so terrified of being seen to have a "liberal bias" that he permits posters to denigrate entire races of people to avoid the label? Or is there something else at work here?

[PocketRocket]

Is Greg really so terrified of being seen to have a "liberal bias" that he permits posters to denigrate entire races of people to avoid the label? Or is there something else at work here?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I for one don't think that's the case.

In the past he has banned people from both ends of the spectrum.

In all cases past I could find a definite offending post made by the person he botted.

I'm just sort of scratching my head on this one

Mirror was, at times, annoying, but that seems to be about as far as it went.

[Guest eureka]

It is baffling, Pocket. I have never noticed anything particularly untoward. But then, I think I may not so hyper sensitive as a few in the paranoia circle.

[Greg]

Another incomprehensible move by Greg. I simply cannot comprehend how Mirror or the Sweal were worse, in any way, than a fair number of people who seem to have free reign on this site.

Is Greg really so terrified of being seen to have a "liberal bias" that he permits posters to denigrate entire races of people to avoid the label? Or is there something else at work here?

I’ve got an idea - leave. Please do me and everyone here a favour and go find somewhere else to discuss politics.

You know it is funny; there are forum participants from both sides of the political spectrum that I have never had to talk to about insults or poor behaviour. Do you want to know why? Because they know how to discuss a topic without appealing to petty slurs and insults. They also know how to take the high road when someone hurls an insult at them. These are the people I prefer in these forums and I will do everything in my power to see that those that fail to head the warnings and repeatedly ignore the rules and guidelines of this forum are shown the door.

If you don’t like it, leave - simple as that.

[GostHacked]

Another incomprehensible move by Greg. I simply cannot comprehend how Mirror or the Sweal were worse, in any way, than a fair number of people who seem to have free reign on this site.

Is Greg really so terrified of being seen to have a "liberal bias" that he permits posters to denigrate entire races of people to avoid the label? Or is there something else at work here?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I’ve got an idea - leave. Please do me and everyone here a favour and go find somewhere else to discuss politics.

You know it is funny; there are forum participants from both sides of the political spectrum that I have never had to talk to about insults or poor behaviour. Do you want to know why? Because they know how to discuss a topic without appealing to petty slurs and insults. They also know how to take the high road when someone hurls an insult at them. These are the people I prefer in these forums and I will do everything in my power to see that those that fail to head the warnings and repeatedly ignore the rules and guidelines of this forum are shown the door.

If you don’t like it, leave - simple as that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well as I see it, there are still a few here that continue to throw the insults along with great informative posts. There are a couple here I would ban in an instant due to their asshattery. I am not going to mention names for that might end my stay here. Are you the only moderator here Greg??

[cybercoma]

The Germany thread has had posts removed from it because they were off-topic. Some of mine were canned from there as well, but it's understandable because they didn't follow the thread topic either. If you peaked into that thread after seeing this one, you wouldn't have seen the posts that Greg is talking about.

[cybercoma]

And one other thing, I don't know why everyone is so upset. Mirror will change his IP by finding a proxy to get around the ban. He's done it several times before and he'll do it again. He probably has 300 posts by now on his new account.

[PocketRocket]

Seeing as I started this thread, I'll take it upon myself to respond to these....but please keep in mind I started this thread for information, not to point fingers at anybody.

The Germany thread has had posts removed from it because they were off-topic.  Some of mine were canned from there as well, but it's understandable because they didn't follow the thread topic either.  If you peaked into that thread after seeing this one, you wouldn't have seen the posts that Greg is talking about.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I looked into the Germany thread the same day the ban was imposed.

If MIRROR wandered off-topic a bit, it didn't seem to be beyond any "wandering" done by various others on this board.

I went beyond the Germany thread, and checked out ALL of MIRROR's posts for about the last 3 or 4 days prior to the ban.

Still didn't find anything that I would have considered ban-worthy.

This is what has me puzzled.

Others that I have seen banned were booted for a definite reason.

Some may have been provoked (one in particular comes to mind), but ultimately they put their own foot (feet) in it and spouted off in a clearly proscribed manner.

In MIRROR's case, I could find nothing of the sort.

I want to be crystal clear on the reason for this thread.

Being that there was no cut-and-dry post in which MIRROR did anything obviously offensive or anything, I simply want to be fully aware of exactly what is and is not permissible here.

I try to remain civil at all times, but like anyone else, I sometimes get caught up in a heated discussion.

It's better to know EXACTLY what can get you booted.

Knowing what got someone else booted can be valuable in an environment wherin the rules are subject to one man's personal interpretation and judgement.

And one other thing, I don't know why everyone is so upset.  Mirror will change his IP by finding a proxy to get around the ban.  He's done it several times before and he'll do it again.  He probably has 300 posts by now on his new account.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If the site administrator himself can't be sure, how can you???

Other than stating that obvious fact, this comment is not worthy of a reply as it is simply an implied slur against someone who cannot appear here to defend himself.

[cybercoma]

If the site administrator himself can't be sure, how can you???

Other than stating that obvious fact, this comment is not worthy of a reply as it is simply an implied slur against someone who cannot appear here to defend himself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What do you mean if the site administrator can't be sure? It's not difficult to tell if someone is using an anonymous proxy. Everyone knows he was bigdude and whoever he was before that (maple something or another?).

Making the post in federal politics about Greg not doing his "job" probably didn't help his cause much either. I don't think Greg needs to come on here and babysit anyone.

Regardless, the direction he was taking in the Germany thread was obviouly off-topic and very distasteful and banning is at Greg's discretion whether any of us agree with the decision or not. It's not really worth beating to death.

Greg pays the bills and does the work on the site, so it's completely fair that everything is up to his sole interpretation.

[PocketRocket]

What do you mean if the site administrator can't be sure? It's not difficult to tell if someone is using an anonymous proxy.  Everyone knows he was bigdude and whoever he was before that (maple something or another?).

I would imagine if he was a previously banned member, and GREG had the means to definitely determine this, that he would have been booted much sooner, like when he first joined up.

Making the post in federal politics about Greg not doing his "job" probably didn't help his cause much either.  I don't think Greg needs to come on here and babysit anyone. 

Others have done the same, and are still here.

1))) Regardless, the direction he was taking in the Germany thread was obviouly off-topic and very distasteful

2))) and banning is at Greg's discretion whether any of us agree with the decision or not. 

3))) It's not really worth beating to death.

1))) Conceded, as I may have missed some of the posts which were removed, though when I searched I found nothing untoward.

2))) I never claimed otherwise, and in the past never argued with one of his bans, and I am not doing so now.

In fact, I have defended his right to ban in the past.

3))) I just want to beat it 'til it bleeds

Greg pays the bills and does the work on the site, so it's completely fair that everything is up to his sole interpretation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The phrase I've used in the past in these sorts of threads is "It's GREG's backyard, and GREG's ball, so he gets to make the rules".

Never questioned this.

As previously stated, in past bannings, there has been a clear-cut, easy to see reason.

In this case it was not so clear-cut.

I started this thread seeking information so as to avoid the possibility of mistakenly doing something similar in the future.

It's not some sort of vendetta or anti-GREG rant, no matter how much others may read that into it.

[catch-as-catch-can]

I started this thread seeking information so as to avoid the possibility of mistakenly doing something similar in the future.

LOL

I used to get banned, but it's all over now.

[kimmy]

What do you mean if the site administrator can't be sure? It's not difficult to tell if someone is using an anonymous proxy.  Everyone knows he was bigdude and whoever he was before that (maple something or another?).

I would imagine if he was a previously banned member, and GREG had the means to definitely determine this, that he would have been booted much sooner, like when he first joined up.

It's beyond a doubt, Rocket, that Mirror and Bigdude were new names of a former member named Maplesyrup. I don't care what the IP addresses or any other information might have said. It was the same guy. There were habits and traits and views and grammatical ticks that gave him away.

And, while I didn't see the messages that got him banned, I liked mirror. He's grown a lot in the 15 months or so that I've been on this board. He has learned to see issues from other viewpoints, something he never used to be able to do.

-k

[Greg]

PocketRocket,

there was not one particular incident that caused Mirror to be banned. It was a culmination of many different incidents that justified his removal. Follow the guidelines and rules, and you'll be fine. Remember, I always give fair warning (via PM) to everyone that crosses the line. Most members who do get banned probably see it coming, and they choose to ignore the signs.

If in fact Mirror, Bigdude, and MapleSyrup where the same people, their IPs did not give it away. I do monitor everyone's IPs to make sure that multiple accounts are deleted and that banned members don't return. But as others have mentioned, it's hardly an exact science, so people can if they are determined enough evade the restrictions on IPs. So if Mirror does return under a different IP address, sooner or later I'll catch up with him - I always do.

catch-as-catch-can, thanks for readily admiting your breaking the rules. You're now banned, again.

[PocketRocket]

PocketRocket,

there was not one particular incident that caused Mirror to be banned.  It was a culmination of many different incidents that justified his removal. 

I see. Cumulative annoyance factor??? Heh heh.

Well, thanks for the reply. It is informative, and exactly the sort of response I was seeking.

Although, I will admit I was under the impression that the rules were a bit more cut-and-dry and required a single, definitive offense to be banned.

I guess I was wrong in thinking that. It is, after all, a judgement call.

Good answer.

Follow the guidelines and rules, and you'll be fine.  Remember, I always give fair warning (via PM) to everyone that crosses the line.  Most members who do get banned probably see it coming, and they choose to ignore the signs.

Now that I know a lot of little offenses can add up to one big one, I'll certainly tread softly.

If in fact Mirror, Bigdude, and MapleSyrup where the same people, their IPs did not give it away.  I do monitor everyone's IPs to make sure that multiple accounts are deleted and that banned members don't return.  But as others have mentioned, it's hardly an exact science, so people can if they are determined enough evade the restrictions on IPs.  So if Mirror does return under a different IP address, sooner or later I'll catch up with him - I always do.

I guess if they're using some sort of IP proxy or something, it's good to give the benefit of the doubt. Better to do if you're not certain.

I suppose if they come back well-behaved, you may not have to bother, but again, that's solely your own judgement call.

catch-as-catch-can, thanks for readily admiting your breaking the rules.  You're now banned, again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To quote Nelson from The Simpsons......(falsetto voice) "Hah hah".

Thanks for the reply, GREG.

As I stated, it's exactly what I wanted to know, or at least sort of exactly

Hopefully I won't make the same mistakes some of our previous members have.

[PocketRocket]

It's beyond a doubt, Rocket, that Mirror and Bigdude were new names of a former member named Maplesyrup.  I don't care what the IP addresses or any other information might have said. It was the same guy.  There were habits and traits and views and grammatical ticks that gave him away.

I'm not so sure. Regarding grammatical ticks and stuf like that, you have to keep in mind that with the millions of people that MIGHT take an interest in this board, many of them are bound to have similar bad grammatical habits.

But if it was indeed the same character, then you're right, he had grown considerably.

And, he'll probably find a way to come back again.

Hmmm. Banning as a contribution to evolution.

If with each ban he/she comes back better-behaved, and with better debating abilities, then we can add a chapter to Darwin

And, while I didn't see the messages that got him banned, I liked mirror.  He's grown a lot in the 15 months or so that I've been on this board.  He has learned to see issues from other viewpoints, something he never used to be able to do.

I found him alternately funny and mildly annoying.

But none of his posts ever really bothered me to any appreciable degree.

But the ban was not my call to make, so, once again he's gone. At least for a while.

-k

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

PR.

And always a pleasure to speak with you.

BTW, what happened to "The Kimmy Party"????

Elections coming up. Better gear up the campaign

[Whosoever]

catch-as-catch-can, thanks for readily admiting your breaking the rules.  You're now banned, again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To quote Nelson from The Simpsons......(falsetto voice) "Hah hah".

Thanks for the reply, GREG.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your signature you make a pretty shocking statement ... "I hate Paul Martin."

Now here you seem to be enjoying another poster's demise.

You know ... there ARE medications for that.