Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Banning of Khaligula


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
145 replies to this topic

#26 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:45 AM

Goes from "I didn't do it" to "that isn't why I did it"...OK. It was inappropriate and didn't serve any purpose as 'counterpointing'.


You claimed I posted his personal information. I didn't post his personal information, somebody else did long before he even registered here.

#27 Nymh

Nymh
  • Keeper of Secrets

  • 4626 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:46 AM

I know I just said I was done, but this level of ignorance irks me to no end. How can someone be allowed to post someone's personal information, such as personal emails and phone numbers, without even receiving a 10% warn when someone someone receives that level warning for saying "go fuck yourself".

Common staff, stop acting like you actually believe that is justified. It makes you look spineless.


I don't believe it was justified. I'm just explaining to you what actually happened, and what has been done to deal with it. Just because I'm on staff doesn't mean that I agree with everything that happens (something you might want to keep in mind).

#28 Turnip

Turnip
  • woomy woomy manmenmi!!

  • 2511 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:46 AM

Hahahaha, I'm so glad that rude thing is gone :V
Aaaaaaa thank you mods <3

#29 onlyme

onlyme
  • I hate everyone.

  • 4319 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:50 AM

Why does the ban of an idiot always causes people who usually like each other to fight? GUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUYS! Make love not war.

#30 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:51 AM

Why does the ban of an idiot always causes people who usually like each other to fight? GUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUYS! Make love not war.


Usually incited by the same small group of individuals too but I guess they have to contribute something to the forum because they certainly don't contribute anything else. :p

#31 onlyme

onlyme
  • I hate everyone.

  • 4319 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:26 AM

Usually incited by the same small group of individuals too but I guess they have to contribute something to the forum because they certainly don't contribute anything else. :p


It's very pointless though. And that coming from me... lol.

#32 Galadriel

Galadriel
  • Creature of the Night

  • 924 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:27 AM

It's very pointless though. And that coming from me... lol.


Yes, so it seems.

#33 artificial

artificial
  • 186 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:27 AM

Usually incited by the same small group of individuals too but I guess they have to contribute something to the forum because they certainly don't contribute anything else. :p


Implying 99% of members actually contribute anything to the forum. Would you rather I be another drone? Would you get off more if I were to simply fall in line and praise you and other staff members for all of the fabulous work you do on the site? I'm pretty sure that's the very point cronus was alluding to. Whenever anybody breaks script (not necessarily the rules), you and other staff members inevitably react (like that thinly veiled attempt at an insult lolol) without consequence.

Personally, I don't care. If you banned him because you don't like him, own it - don't skirt around it. However, for a website that enforces its rules so diligently (honestly some of those warns are ridiculous) it just seems highly hypocritical to ban someone for such a pathetic and personal reason. It brings me back to my original question: why hasn't iargue been banned? Nobody likes him and he single handedly brings the IQ of the board down 10 points (and renders the debating section pointless with his idiocy).

#34 Mishelle

Mishelle
  • Bitch Of The Boards

  • 2245 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:42 AM

If you really found the bullshit he regularly churned out refreshing you need to look at your life and look at your choices. He did not come here to foster any type of discussion he came here to start shit and whenever anyone proved him wrong he would resort to lame ass brotard memes and typi lyk dis 2 mak fun of ppl even tho no1 types lyk dis. He was an annoying idiot. Good riddance.

#35 artificial

artificial
  • 186 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:45 AM

If you really found the bullshit he regularly churned out refreshing you need to look at your life and look at your choices.


lol.

I've got nothing else to add.

#36 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:46 AM

Personally, I don't care. If you banned him because you don't like him, own it - don't skirt around it. However, for a website that enforces its rules so diligently (honestly some of those warns are ridiculous) it just seems highly hypocritical to ban someone for such a pathetic and personal reason. It brings me back to my original question: why hasn't iargue been banned? Nobody likes him and he single handedly brings the IQ of the board down 10 points (and renders the debating section pointless with his idiocy).


He wasn't banned because people (or the staff) don't like him. He was banned for trolling, disrupting the forum, consistently breaking the rules, insulting members and doing other things like swearing at admins (which wouldn't be visible to everybody else, of course). Iargue doesn't do those things.

#37 artificial

artificial
  • 186 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:53 AM

He wasn't banned because people (or the staff) don't like him. He was banned for trolling, disrupting the forum, consistently breaking the rules, insulting members and doing other things like swearing at admins (which wouldn't be visible to everybody else, of course). Iargue doesn't do those things.


Doesn't explain why he wasn't afforded the 100% warn decay option like every other member. There's nothing in the rules about an auto ban for trolling (at best, it's implied with "trolling is not welcome at neocodex, but that's a weak association). Perhaps it's time you changed the rules. At the end of the day, he insulted a few staff members (namely you), and was seemingly banned because of it. Nothing you've said thus far has strengthened your argument.

#38 Nymh

Nymh
  • Keeper of Secrets

  • 4626 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:59 AM

Doesn't explain why he wasn't afforded the 100% warn decay option like every other member. There's nothing in the rules about an auto ban for trolling (at best, it's implied with "trolling is not welcome at neocodex, but that's a weak association). Perhaps it's time you changed the rules. At the end of the day, he insulted a few staff members (namely you), and was seemingly banned because of it. Nothing you've said thus far has strengthened your argument.


He had a systematic disregard for our rules. He was given several formal and informal warnings, and continued to violate the terms of his prolonged membership here even after being warned by multiple staff members regarding his behavior. He had no respect for our staff whatsoever, even in personal conversations with him, and no intent to fulfill any of our stipulations unless they were forcefully put upon him (such as removing his ability to post in certain sections, putting him on mod preview, removing his ability to make status updates, etc.).

And, like Waser said before, this has precedent in two other members who had been banned without 100% warn. We decided to cut our losses as it was clear to us that he had no intentions of altering his behavior. This seemed to be the best option for the community as a whole.

#39 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:01 AM

Doesn't explain why he wasn't afforded the 100% warn decay option like every other member. There's nothing in the rules about an auto ban for trolling (at best, it's implied with "trolling is not welcome at neocodex, but that's a weak association). Perhaps it's time you changed the rules. At the end of the day, he insulted a few staff members (namely you), and was seemingly banned because of it. Nothing you've said thus far has strengthened your argument.


I wasn't arguing any point, I was stating the facts of why he was actually banned as you seemed to be under the mistaken impression that he was banned because the staff didn't like him or because he insulted me (which I don't actually recall him doing). Perhaps, as you suggest, the rules should be updated, I'm sure we'll discuss it in the next staff meeting.

I would also point out that the current rules already give the admins discretion to make their own decisions without people accumulating 100% warns:

Punishments will be deemed according by the Administration and Staff.

Please note that these rules are merely guidelines and will vary depending on the situation.


The rules don't state that a user must reach 100% to be banned permanently, merely that if they do reach 100% warning points that they will be permanently banned as a result.

#40 luvsmyncis

luvsmyncis
  • I have no friends.

  • 6724 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:05 AM

If you really found the bullshit he regularly churned out refreshing you need to look at your life and look at your choices.

*Looks at life. Looks at choices* Oh man. When I look at these things, I'm victim to a growing darkness and depression that will someday consume my soul. It's best for me not to think about it, to be honest.

He was just here to argue with people, and the same could be said for a number of CODEXIANS. But, because his rebuttals consisted of attacks, I think it became too personal for people, so it's for the GREATER GOOD that he has been banned. At least now we can post internet quiz results in peace.

#41 HappyAccident

HappyAccident
  • 408 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:16 AM

post internet quiz results in peace.


Amen!

#42 Nymh

Nymh
  • Keeper of Secrets

  • 4626 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:36 AM

I think what this thread and the conversations therein boil down to is that some of you guys don't trust that we do things behind the scenes which justify the actions (or perceived inactions) that you see us carry out publicly. Someone gets banned or warned (or not) and not having seen everything that builds up to that, members end up feeling that things happen for no good reason or we're just enforcing rules (or bending them, or completely disregarding them) willy-nilly when we feel like it.

We are arbiters. We try to be neutral, however we all have our biases - this is why there are several of us, to balance each other out, because we are all human. We discuss things and (usually) come to a consensus. Does that mean we act as a solid unit? No. Does that mean that the admins don't have ultimate authority? No. Does that mean that the rules are set in stone, strictly enforced the same exact way for everything that happens on (and off) the board? No.

There is a lot that happens here that most members are not aware of. Not only because you don't sit and refresh the board 24/7, but because most of this process happens outside of the public eye. You guys see a warn for abusive behavior, we see a report with staff conversation attached, a dozen hidden posts and (usually) a PM conversation with the member. You guys see a ban, we see months of trying to reason with a member, hours spent discussing the issue with the rest of the staff, multiple PM conversations with the member and staff, dozens of reports with lengthy staff conversations attached, and hundreds upon hundreds of hidden posts.

I don't blame anyone for being skeptical; it's a good thing. Blind faith and trust is boring and doesn't help anyone. But I hope you can understand if we seem a little defensive. It's not like we all got together and said, "Eh, Khaligula's getting annoying, and he insulted me. Let's ban him." If that were the case, there would be a lot more banned members :p

#43 Tocsin

Tocsin
  • 32 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:48 AM

Close this thread now. You don't owe these people anything.

#44 Galadriel

Galadriel
  • Creature of the Night

  • 924 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:51 AM

Close this thread now. You don't owe these people anything.


This guy means business.

#45 luvsmyncis

luvsmyncis
  • I have no friends.

  • 6724 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:59 AM

This guy means business.


I admire his balls.

#46 artificial

artificial
  • 186 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:01 AM

Close this thread now. You don't owe these people anything.


A business doesn't owe its customers anything? You may have balls, but no brains.

#47 Tocsin

Tocsin
  • 32 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:03 AM

Nymh is going out of her way as a courtesy not an obligation. I would have told you all to go fuck yourselves on page 1

#48 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:10 AM

A business doesn't owe its customers anything? You may have balls, but no brains.


I figured by "these people" he probably meant you and cronus specifically rather than all of our members.

#49 Kyle

Kyle
  • Legit.

  • 2082 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:12 AM

A business doesn't owe its customers anything? You may have balls, but no brains.

The banning doesn't affect the product which is available for purchase on NeoCodex (Advanced program privileges).

#50 Galadriel

Galadriel
  • Creature of the Night

  • 924 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:15 AM

I figured by "these people" he probably meant you and cronus specifically rather than all of our members.


if that is the case then he obviously didn't understand the point I was trying to make. The point was, in simplest form: that staff can act out of line and be dealt with by a set of rules different to those which govern normal members. While there have been some lengthly replies, no member of staff has even acknowledged that this is the case and that it is hypocritcal.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users