View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:21 am



Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Mr. Oragahn and Mojo's warning's fair? 
Author Message
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6862
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It wasn't meant to be harsh. I just don't see the point for Praeothmin (and even Mike) to remain mods if, first, they obviously can't enjoy their "job" of keeping this place clean (a place they appreciate, obviously), and secondly, if they're condemned to a half-arsed and very selective level of surveillance where they have to turn heads in light of certain misbehaviours.
Well you made it sound like you had lost all faith and he should just give it up for what amounts to a single poster skating by in the gray area of the rules.
I am of the opinion having Mike and Praeothmin "on guard" is better even if they are having trouble "convicting" SWST than no guard at all so to speak.


Gray area?
...
There's been enough evidence to ban him several times over.
The evidence of the confirmed cases was so strong that he actually got banned twice.
I don't think there's any grayer area beyond the obvious and needless fudging that's going on.
Do you realize that the problem of convicting SWST doesn't even come from an issue about the understanding of the rules?
From day one I could tell he was a troll, and everybody knew it some few weeks later when everybody had the privilege of biting into his carcass.
So what's the cryptic code of conduct I'm not privy to?

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
This makes for a very broken system, one that is not very fair. See, I don't think one insult every two weeks (!) hurts that board. In fact, it's just as much a right as being able to speak out your mind. But what SWST does, that is hurting this place.
The issue is that one insult every two weeks is against the board rules, while SWST may break their spirit he mostly stays within their confines.


Bull-fucking-shit.
The rule Mojo quoted is extremely clear in fact, but it takes the mods to actually acknowledge some facts and do a little more work beyond sitting on their hands and pretending all goes well aside from the few OMG outrageous fucks that slip every once in a while.

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Oh shit, if this doesn't get solved presto, I'm gone off this place.
If that is how you feel. Personally I don't find him that big of an issue as you and the rest find him. An irritant yes but only so. One that will leave/fade away at somepoint in time.


Until the next one. No doubt that such a policy could very well attract other trolls who will have a pleasure to remain polite while shitting on basic notions about respect and rules to follow as to nourish constructive and pleasant discourse.
There's no point continuing this dance.


Mike DiCenso wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Oh shit, if this doesn't get solved presto, I'm gone off this place. I think there's nothing worse than a board that openly supports trolls' drive to disrupt the quality and cohesion of a nice forum in light of whatever stupid testes-less ultra-leftist rule that wants to give any damn retarded cunt in the world a right to endlessly pollute the lives of other correct and kind people.
I'm not going to ignore him. I'm saying that he gets the fuck out of this place, or I do.
Capice?


I think you're way over-reacting to SWST. But consider this; if you leave now, his trolling as you call it will have been successful, and the only person to lose out will be you. If you ignore SWST as other people have started doing, he'll go away eventually, or he'll slip up, as he has been recently doing, and get banned. He's only one away from another ban, you know.

Don't make yourself a casualty before then.
-Mike


Over-reacting? You mean, to compensate the under-reacting from the other side, right?
Tell me, why didn't you even process the full report I forwarded in this damned thread, as you asked? Being lazy or something?
Or what? Do like Praeothmin said, and only stick to passive radar sweeps on insults, minor or fierce, and let the rest of the crap fly under?

In case you didn't notice, I've already played that exact same silly game, and we've seen where it went : absolutely no-where.
This board is tried. We've reached a state where the mere abrasive coating of strong language seems to prove more critical and endangering than a mystifying challenger of the very fundamentals of reasonable and informative discussion we've enjoyed so far.
How ridiculous...
I'm not putting this down because something needs to be done and we won't wait to see other trolls repeat that same nonsense.
Yeah, because if it's not very clear to you guys, you're establishing what we call a precedent here. The kind that stinks. The kind that says in bright neon letters: trolls allowed, insults forbidden.


Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:52 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1777
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
[
Oh shit, if this doesn't get solved presto, I'm gone off this place. I think there's nothing worse than a board that openly supports trolls' drive to disrupt the quality and cohesion of a nice forum in light of whatever stupid testes-less ultra-leftist rule that wants to give any damn retarded cunt in the world a right to endlessly pollute the lives of other correct and kind people.
I'm not going to ignore him. I'm saying that he gets the fuck out of this place, or I do.
Capice?


your worth a dozen average members of any forum you can't leave if JMS does not see that your quality supersedes SWSt's right to freedom of speech then he's a worthless admin who's openly shown fear and weakness in the face of the SDN vangaurd...say what you want about us comic debaters but we never yielded in such a cowardly display- we never put the rules above the harmony of the forum and the members


Praeothmin wrote:
It's your choice, and your call...


then I'll take it out of his hands Praeo, if O goes I'm going to get SWST off this forum and I'm going to do it the rumbler way..I really don't care if I have to take that little prick down with me at this point being a member of a forum were the Admin has openly chosen to sacrifice quality and stability to uphold his own warped sense of the "civility rule' then I'm with O it's not worth it

mind you I'm not okay with him leaving I think he has more value than myself as well and would much rather become an hero then to see him leave because of this bullshit

mojo wrote:
snipped!


you know really if Mojo's right and all this guys worried about is a dedicated opposition from the other side I've got absolutely no problem switching to the Wars side of the defense I'm well versed in movie lore and have no issue with it and I can probably manage an argument better than SWST

Mike DiCenso wrote:
[

You wouldn't be alone. I'm the one who pushed through the first and second successful bans on SWST. How did I do it? It was steadily and carefully building a strong case against him. For good measure I ran the first by JMS to make sure it was foolproof and it could not be appealed. But having Praeo continue as a mod is good. When I was busy with real-life concerns, Praeo dropped in and issued the current warnings against SWST.
-Mike


and I applaud your dedication and maybe was a little too hostile with you in the first place but you know what? all your efforts? in vain..look at the situation we're in now? That, and your boss has either gone soft..gotten burned out or is so obsessed with one upping Mike Wong and coming off as the morally virtuous paragon to that mans abusive modship he's lost sight of the matter and become a Bizzaro Wong and lost his god damn mind


Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:40 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1777
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
I'm not putting this down because something needs to be done and we won't wait to see other trolls repeat that same nonsense.
Yeah, because if it's not very clear to you guys, you're establishing what we call a precedent here. The kind that stinks. The kind that says in bright neon letters: trolls allowed, insults forbidden.


JMS tired old warrior of the vs debates..heed this mans words for he has absolutely and clearly illuminated the core reason why what you are doing is dangerous and bad. Take care that this monstrosity that you have permitted into your house does not destroy it, and in the process completely turn you into that which you have striven for years not to become.

although I fear it's already too late for that given your inaction


Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:51 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Posts: 1636
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Gray area?
Yes. SWST standard shtick , that of a mouthpiece of SDN talking points, is not in and of itself any violation. Only his incessant and blatant rebooting the debate every third or so posting which does not provide as clear cut case as say if he dropped into a profanity laced rant. Hence gray area.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
I don't think there's any grayer area beyond the obvious and needless fudging that's going on.
Do you realize that the problem of convicting SWST doesn't even come from an issue about the understanding of the rules?
I would think the rules are an issue. If he started into irrantional rants and insults like KSW was prone to he'd have been booted long ago. He hasn't instead being mostly obtuse and JMS on more than occasion decided he wasn't breaking the rules and removed warnings.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
From day one I could tell he was a troll, and everybody knew it some few weeks later when everybody had the privilege of biting into his carcass.
It is the proving that he's a troll that is the issue and that has gone pear shaped from time to time. What we "know" is meaningless only what we can make a case out of.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Bull-fucking-shit.
The rule Mojo quoted is extremely clear in fact, but it takes the mods to actually acknowledge some facts and do a little more work beyond sitting on their hands and pretending all goes well aside from the few OMG outrageous fucks that slip every once in a while.

He quoted the rule to be reasonable, to be polite and be informative, unless you are refering to something from another thread, which as he stated is a very vauge and ill defined rule to try and drop the hammer down. He appeared to argue instead of a "nation of laws" so to speak but for a "nation of men" indicating that the mods simply should do what is needed to be done to be rid of SWST and using the rule as a pretext to justify it afterwards. Hardly a rock solid case.

Now if you have evidence of SWST being rude, of using disinformation like using fake evidence knowingly that would be something but what Mojo posted isn't evidence and it was most assuredly not reasonable.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Until the next one. No doubt that such a policy could very well attract other trolls who will have a pleasure to remain polite while shitting on basic notions about respect and rules to follow as to nourish constructive and pleasant discourse.
So they'll be another somewhere down the line. He'll be banned or lose interest. As I've said SWST doesn't strike me as a big issue and to be frank his biggest victory has to be in the reactions of the other posters about calling for his ban.


Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:11 am
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am
Posts: 1162
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:
@Mojo:

So if I am understanding you correctly you are suggesting JMS is delibertly keeping SWST around to keep the debate alive? To maintain board interest with a noisy dissenter among the ranks. Color me skeptical of that line of thought, assuming the whole thing wasn't one of your jokes that I didn't get again, it seems to cut across everything JMS has professed to stand for as well I'm not sure SWST is really adding much volume to the board. At least as it portains to the actual versus argument, he pops into a dead or dying thread makes a few wild accusations that more annoy than anything maybe trades a few reply with a poster or two than vanishes again. Compared to the "ink" slung complaining about him in the technical forum I'm not sure he's really adding anything debatewise.

yeah, you've made your position and your feelings clear more than once. i was more posting from stream of consciousness than attempting a serious argument, but i think it works a hell of a lot better than simply professing bafflement and calling it a day. you and a few others like to bring up the 'well, he doesn't really bother me that much' point quite a bit. that's fine as far as it goes, but it does nothing to help the situation and from the viewpoint of someone who sees swst as the cancer that's killing /b, it's borderline insulting. weren't you actually the person who spent three or four paragraphs telling me how my 9 joking comments were worse than swst's entire career of malevolent posting? i hope i'm mistaken, because that person is clearly not equipped with the correct faculties to judge anything when it comes to trolls, their actions, their intentions, or the consequences of their continued presence.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
At this point, why don't you quit modhood?

Quote:
Isn't that a little harsh? Praeothmin is trying to solve the issue as best he can and I don't see how the problem will improve with his termination and could possibly decline from it.

when 'as best he can' means 'no real consequence for openly trolling the board since november 23, 2010, over the course of 654 malevolent posts' then it's baffling that anyone would have a problem with oragahn's suggestion. i LIKE praeothmin. i've sent him IMs when i felt i had gone too far in his direction with my antics and worried i might have hurt his feelings. i've softened jokes and curtailed comments completely that i thought had real comedic value because i like the guy and i don't want to figuratively kick him in the balls. i don't even think it's his fault that he's had such poor luck with swst. mike either, to be honest. but the fact is that swst has been trolling WITH INTENT TO HARM (which by the way is the reason swst will ALWAYS be a far better troll than i am, given that i'm always, without exception, simply going for a laugh) for 654 posts and is not only accepted but welcomed by the existing staff.


Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:35 am
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 3879
Location: Quebec City
Reply with quote
mojo wrote:
i LIKE praeothmin.


Why mojo, I didn't know you cared... ^_^

Mr. Oragahn, this is the firmest rule of the Forum:
Quote:
No flaming. Insults, attacks, and rudeness all serve as obstacles to discourse; they will not be tolerated.


And this is the rule concerning SWS... I mean, Trolls:
Quote:
Act in good faith. Trolling, dishonesty, and other forms of insincere behavior may be penalized at our discretion.


When warnings were issued for Trolling, they were reversed and the Bans lifted...
Mike had to fight teeth and nails for the following ones to even be considered, yet alone be upheld....
I don't feel like swimming upstream anymore...

Mike, I do think Mr. O. has collected a fine example of SWST trolling, being dishonest, and willingly ignoring arguments and evidence...
Do you want to take the bull by the horns and issue a fourth, and bannable, warning (which could get overturned)?
I don't...


Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:31 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Posts: 1636
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA
Reply with quote
mojo wrote:
yeah, you've made your position and your feelings clear more than once.
Okay doing a quick and dirty search it appears the last I've spoken on the subject of SWST banning/trolling was on Saturday June 11 of this year I hardly think I'm excessively pushing my point of view.

mojo wrote:
you and a few others like to bring up the 'well, he doesn't really bother me that much' point quite a bit. that's fine as far as it goes, but it does nothing to help the situation
Sigh. I said it as well as Mike in response to Mr. Oragahn giving the ultimatium that either SWST leaves or he does. Hardly a broken record and hardly the only thing done in response to SWST. I mean Mike has gotten the guy banned twice now, I really don't see any standing to this line of argument of yours.

mojo wrote:
from the viewpoint of someone who sees swst as the cancer that's killing /b, it's borderline insulting.
Well we all have our differnt viewpoints. That really can't be helped unless your willing to join the Borg Collective.

mojo wrote:
weren't you actually the person who spent three or four paragraphs telling me how my 9 joking comments were worse than swst's entire career of malevolent posting?
I don't recall stating that particularly, when was this? I mean its possible, I do find some of your more...unorthodox antics less than amusing and for the most part less than helpful.

mojo wrote:
when 'as best he can' means 'no real consequence for openly trolling the board since november 23, 2010, over the course of 654 malevolent posts' then it's baffling that anyone would have a problem with oragahn's suggestion.
Mostly because I fail to see how that would improve the situation one iota,the blame if any for SWST continued presence does not fall on Mike or Praeo, and I understand SWST doesn't have 654 malevolent posts but rather several hundred boilerplate posts cookiecut from a list of talking points in and of themselves not a violation of any rules.

mojo wrote:
for 654 posts and is not only accepted but welcomed by the existing staff.
He has far from been welcomed by the staff. At best JMS has been too forgiving in regards to him which can't be extended to our mods who have done everything short of tying SWST to a rocket and sending him to the moon to be ride of him.


Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:55 pm
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 3879
Location: Quebec City
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:
everything short of tying SWST to a rocket and sending him to the moon to be ride of him.


Well, I wasn't successful in securing a rocke... I mean, that would not have been nice...


Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:05 pm
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6862
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Gray area?
Yes. SWST standard shtick , that of a mouthpiece of SDN talking points, is not in and of itself any violation. Only his incessant and blatant rebooting the debate every third or so posting which does not provide as clear cut case as say if he dropped into a profanity laced rant. Hence gray area.


That he parrots points is but a portion of the problem, aside from the fact that copying and pasting one's arguments endlessly hardly makes for an informative discussion at all.
It's not like he was citing philosophers and explaining what they meant and then agreeing or disagreeing with them. He just parrots and hardly changed his style despite kind counsel.
Plus, you are totally confusing the complicated understanding of some nebulous rules and ideological conflicts between standards of morals and ethics with something that is much simpler in terms of abstraction or even intellectual effort: the work that needs to be put into moderating SWST.
Simply put, the rules are not gray at all. They are extremely clear, but what makes the moderation difficult is the menial work -not the brainstorming- that needs to be done to detect those violations.
I don't believe one instant that there's anything gray when everybody knew that SWST was trolling very early on in this adventure. If there were a gray area, as you posit, there would be a massive divide in regards to the qualification of SWST's methods as trolling and dishonest. This never happened. The problem is one of work and time and tracking all his mischief.

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
I don't think there's any grayer area beyond the obvious and needless fudging that's going on.
Do you realize that the problem of convicting SWST doesn't even come from an issue about the understanding of the rules?
I would think the rules are an issue. If he started into irrantional rants and insults like KSW was prone to he'd have been booted long ago. He hasn't instead being mostly obtuse and JMS on more than occasion decided he wasn't breaking the rules and removed warnings.


I'm tempted to argue that JMS doesn't understand his own rules then, because there's clearly been nothing reasonable about SWST, and his posts hardly are informative at all. Plus they've been abusively provocative and he even openly stated that he didn't bother reading the first part of a thread which he jumped in, that after begging for evidence from the very same damn thread, and he expected people to "repost their arguments" when it was clear he ignored them anyway.
That's just a minute part of all the problems he represents.

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
From day one I could tell he was a troll, and everybody knew it some few weeks later when everybody had the privilege of biting into his carcass.
It is the proving that he's a troll that is the issue and that has gone pear shaped from time to time. What we "know" is meaningless only what we can make a case out of.


Not, it is not an issue. We all know it, we've all seen it, and he's even been banned twice, partly for that kind of behaviour. I even did a complete report on him about said trolling and we all know it was a minuscule fraction of the entire phenomenon. So please stop being obtuse about very simple and clear things.
This has nothing to do with winning an argument, it has all to do with respecting people, their opinion, their work and showing that you are here to pay attention to what they say and then, and only then, agree or show how wrong they are. It's mutual respect, which SWST fails at.

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Bull-fucking-shit.
The rule Mojo quoted is extremely clear in fact, but it takes the mods to actually acknowledge some facts and do a little more work beyond sitting on their hands and pretending all goes well aside from the few OMG outrageous fucks that slip every once in a while.

He quoted the rule to be reasonable, to be polite and be informative, unless you are referring to something from another thread, which as he stated is a very vauge and ill defined rule to try and drop the hammer down.


Ah? I challenge you to show how his excessive verbose proved to be so informative, and how his overall behaviour and methods of debating proved to be reasonable.
Or perhaps trolling is reasonable?

Quote:
He appeared to argue instead of a "nation of laws" so to speak but for a "nation of men" indicating that the mods simply should do what is needed to be done to be rid of SWST and using the rule as a pretext to justify it afterwards. Hardly a rock solid case.


What are you talking about? What's that obscure case you're thinking of?

Quote:
Now if you have evidence of SWST being rude, of using disinformation like using fake evidence knowingly that would be something but what Mojo posted isn't evidence and it was most assuredly not reasonable.


I sent a report a few days ago, to the mods, and I posted it here after Mike asked me to do that, although I was rather annoyed.
Sure, it's not as long as the damn lengthy thing I posted the last time, but there was enough evidence nonetheless.

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Until the next one. No doubt that such a policy could very well attract other trolls who will have a pleasure to remain polite while shitting on basic notions about respect and rules to follow as to nourish constructive and pleasant discourse.
So they'll be another somewhere down the line. He'll be banned or lose interest. As I've said SWST doesn't strike me as a big issue and to be frank his biggest victory has to be in the reactions of the other posters about calling for his ban.


Why do you claim that the next troll would be banned if he plays like SWST, which we all know doesn't get him banned?
You're burrowing your head in the sand and refuse to see reality.





Praeothmin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn, this is the firmest rule of the Forum:
Quote:
No flaming. Insults, attacks, and rudeness all serve as obstacles to discourse; they will not be tolerated.


And this is the rule concerning SWS... I mean, Trolls:
Quote:
Act in good faith. Trolling, dishonesty, and other forms of insincere behavior may be penalized at our discretion.


When warnings were issued for Trolling, they were reversed and the Bans lifted...
Mike had to fight teeth and nails for the following ones to even be considered, yet alone be upheld....
I don't feel like swimming upstream anymore...


Hence why I asked you why you bothered remaining a mod. IF every time you do your job, and more precisely the hardest part of your job, you get a polite "fuck off", why continue. Are you masochistic?

Quote:
Mike, I do think Mr. O. has collected a fine example of SWST trolling, being dishonest, and willingly ignoring arguments and evidence...
Do you want to take the bull by the horns and issue a fourth, and bannable, warning (which could get overturned)?
I don't...


Not only I think it would be a good decision, but I also think that some serious clarification needs to be done about what the "discretion" is all about.
As far as I am concerned, the bit in pink, above, still stands true.


Last edited by Mr. Oragahn on Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:39 pm
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm
Posts: 5730
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
I'm tempted to argue that JMS doesn't understand his own rules then, because there's clearly been nothing reasonable about SWST, and his posts hardly are informative at all. Plus they've been abusively provocative and he even openly stated that he didn't bother reading the first part of a thread which he jumped in, that after begging for evidence from the very same damn thread, and he expected people to "repost their arguments" when it was clear he ignored them anyway.
That's just a minute part of all the problems he represents.


This is a good example of dishonesty and more, Mr. Oragahn. I don't believe Praeothmin included this example in with his recent warnings issued to SWST. If he didn't, then this would be grounds for a fourth warning and subsequent ban.
-Mike


Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:39 pm
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am
Posts: 1162
Reply with quote
please be careful, oragahn. i can't overstate your value to this forum. if you actually did just leave, or get permabanned, i'd probably just follow you right out the door. EVERY SINGLE TIME i've been upset about something enough to kick up a fuss, you've been right there explaining in simple logic the things that had me cursing and frothing at the mouth, not to mention all the times you understood that i was only kidding when noone else did. even when you didn't think it was funny.


Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:35 am
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Posts: 1636
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
That he parrots points is but a portion of the problem, aside from the fact that copying and pasting one's arguments endlessly hardly makes for an informative discussion at all.
It's not like he was citing philosophers and explaining what they meant and then agreeing or disagreeing with them. He just parrots and hardly changed his style despite kind counsel.
Plus, you are totally confusing the complicated understanding of some nebulous rules and ideological conflicts between standards of morals and ethics with something that is much simpler in terms of abstraction or even intellectual effort: the work that needs to be put into moderating SWST.
Simply put, the rules are not gray at all. They are extremely clear, but what makes the moderation difficult is the menial work -not the brainstorming- that needs to be done to detect those violations.
I don't believe one instant that there's anything gray when everybody knew that SWST was trolling very early on in this adventure. If there were a gray area, as you posit, there would be a massive divide in regards to the qualification of SWST's methods as trolling and dishonest. This never happened. The problem is one of work and time and tracking all his mischief.
I would of course argue that the need to link back and overview a body of work to prove or disprove if he is trolling proves he's operating in the gray area otherwise you could simply link to a singular example but I very much doubt we will see eye to eye on this.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
I'm tempted to argue that JMS doesn't understand his own rules then, because there's clearly been nothing reasonable about SWST
It is his rules and he can interpet them as he see fits and has stated he has no desire to regulate debates for good or ill.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Not, it is not an issue. We all know it, we've all seen it, and he's even been banned twice, partly for that kind of behaviour. I even did a complete report on him about said trolling and we all know it was a minuscule fraction of the entire phenomenon. So please stop being obtuse about very simple and clear things.
I am not being obtuse. JMS has overturned "convictions" on "appeal" before. Clearly making a convincing case is the issue, that you disagree with the ruling or "know" the truth doesn't change the above fact.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
This has nothing to do with winning an argument, it has all to do with respecting people, their opinion, their work and showing that you are here to pay attention to what they say and then, and only then, agree or show how wrong they are. It's mutual respect, which SWST fails at.
And the rules do not seem to make a provision for "respect" merely disrespect. Again I find SWST a pest and will be glad when he has moved on to greener pastures but I can not agree merely being a lockminded parrot of someone else's talking points should in and of itself be a ban worthy offense.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Ah? I challenge you to show how his excessive verbose proved to be so informative, and how his overall behaviour and methods of debating proved to be reasonable.
I wouldn't. And were I the supreme dictator of boardistan I would permaban him at the speed of light. That doesn't mean however I consider being unreasonable in my opinion or failing to be informative as a rock solid evidence of breaking the rules and everyone from the mods on up deserve what comes across as skorn for not making the "obvious" solution.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
What are you talking about?


Mojo wrote:
that is the vaguest rule i've ever seen in my life, and what's worse, it seems to me that the purpose of that vagueness is probably to allow staff to interpret the law for themselves.


Mojo wrote:
there's no specific rule against this thing or that thing BECAUSE WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU WON'T BE BOUND BY RULES THAT WOULD INHIBIT YOUR ABILITY TO MODERATE AS YOU SEE FIT.


Mojo wrote:
YOU choose what constitutes reasonable, polite, informative debate. you admit that he's a problem and that he does not debate in a reasonable way. isn't that enough right there?


Barring a massive misunderstanding on my part the above would strongly suggest Mojo suggesting to the Mods to reinterpet the rules in order to achieve a desirious result for the "good of the board". That would be a nation of men where instead of being written in stone laws are permutable and change from situation to situation. I do not see that as a desirious outcome.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
What's that obscure case you're thinking of?
That would be a reference to your implication that Mojo had presented a clear cut breakage of a rule. At best he has a vauge, open ended rule which is debatable if it was meant to be used in the capacity he's attempting. Most assuredly that isn't an ironclad, failproof case against our troll.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
I sent a report a few days ago, to the mods, and I posted it here after Mike asked me to do that, although I was rather annoyed.
And he already has three warnings if I recall correctly so as long as one sticks he gets booted again. So we'll see.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Why do you claim that the next troll would be banned if he plays like SWST, which we all know doesn't get him banned?
He's been banned twice and currently has a mess of warnings. Either he'll drop even his reduced antics and at least pretend to debate, get tired and leave or end up being kicked. One way or the other he'll be dealt with.


Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:41 pm
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6862
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
This will get us nowhere. I obviously disagree on nearly all of your points, but it's not particularly useful to push this any further. I'll just wait and see what goes on.
It's simply sad that what may get SWST kicked is not how annoying he is but how JMS would be annoyed by the bans enforced by his mods whom he doesn't agree with.


Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:49 pm
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm
Posts: 5730
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
This will get us nowhere. I obviously disagree on nearly all of your points, but it's not particularly useful to push this any further. I'll just wait and see what goes on. It's simply sad that what may get SWST kicked is not how annoying he is but how JMS would be annoyed by the bans enforced by his mods whom he doesn't agree with.


It will just take a while. But I will say this, given your own experiance dealing with the mods of SBC, you of all people should know the importance of another mod or an admin overriding another, even if it goes against popular opinion. So let this take it's course, and just try and keep yourself in check.

It's not worth it to destroy yourself over it.
-Mike


Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:01 am
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am
Posts: 1162
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:
Barring a massive misunderstanding on my part the above would strongly suggest Mojo suggesting to the Mods to reinterpet the rules in order to achieve a desirious result for the "good of the board". That would be a nation of men where instead of being written in stone laws are permutable and change from situation to situation. I do not see that as a desirious outcome.

i don't understand how you could conceivably have read the tidbits you quoted and NOT see that that is exactly the situation. there are NO set in stone rules. there is only ONE rule, and then a few notes to help understand that ONE rule.

JMS wrote:
In truth, this board has one rule:

All discourse is to be reasonable, polite, and informative.


please explain to me how i am misinterpreting this situation. explain how this can be thought of as a set of rules and conduct which can be used to moderate the forum WITHOUT the mods simply viewing every post while thinking, 'is this reasonable? is this polite? is this informative?'

this is a pointless debate, though, as the mods and jms himself are active on the board. ANY CHANCE OF GETTING SOME CLARIFICATION HERE?


Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:53 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.