Juan and Insomnia Red

[denominator]

Exactly, I mean I don't have a problem with Saxlad. I think he's a great guy. Granted, I don't know much about him personally. But I do know that rdsrds2120 is a 16 year old little boy. I mean come on. Have you ever known a 16 year old kid to make good decisions or admit that they are wrong?

JM2C

In all fairness, you're now stereotyping. I have no doubt that there are 16 year old boys out there that can do a great job of moderating, or 20 year old girls. But to discriminate against them being moderators just on their age and sex is actually worse than what Juan got banned for.

However, I still think all moderators should be judged on their abilities, and should or shouldn't be selected based on that more than the age/sex demographic that they fit into.

[theherkman]

Exactly, I mean I don't have a problem with Saxlad. I think he's a great guy. Granted, I don't know much about him personally. But I do know that rdsrds2120 is a 16 year old little boy. I mean come on. Have you ever known a 16 year old kid to make good decisions or admit that they are wrong?

JM2C

In all fairness, you're now stereotyping. I have no doubt that there are 16 year old boys out there that can do a great job of moderating, or 20 year old girls. But to discriminate against them being moderators just on their age and sex is actually worse than what Juan got banned for.

However, I still think all moderators should be judged on their abilities, and should or shouldn't be selected based on that more than the age/sex demographic that they fit into.

You're right, it is sterotyping. Now, have you known a 16 year old male to make it a habit to admit they are wrong or not want control/power over others? If so, is this common? Thus the reason for the sterotype. Like most democrats spending more than most republicans. Or most republicans lowering taxes or allowing tax breaks. Sterotypes can be true. Can they not?

[ViperOverLord]

22:55:02 ‹jakewilliams› hi
18/11/2010 22:55:10 ‹theherkman› Hi
18/11/2010 22:55:19 * TheForgivenOne joins Social
18/11/2010 22:55:47 ‹theherkman› Jake, you got any speeders going?
18/11/2010 22:57:30 ‹InsomniaRed› theherkman, ask about games in Callouts, please.
18/11/2010 22:57:35 ‹InsomniaRed› TFO!
18/11/2010 22:57:42 ‹theherkman› Wasn't looking for a game.
18/11/2010 22:57:46 ‹theherkman› It was just a question.
18/11/2010 22:57:51 ‹TheForgivenOne› InsomniaRed
18/11/2010 22:58:04 ‹InsomniaRed› Well it's a question that belongs in Callouts or a PM
18/11/2010 22:59:01 ‹Risky_Stud› what if he was asking about land speeder's?
18/11/2010 22:59:08 ‹theherkman› No it isn't. I wasn't asking for a game.
18/11/2010 22:59:22 ‹theherkman› It belongs in Social because it is a social question.
18/11/2010 22:59:26 ‹TheForgivenOne›
18/11/2010 22:59:44 ‹TheForgivenOne› I though questions belonged in Help
18/11/2010 23:00:05 ‹Risky_Stud› is that a question TFO?
18/11/2010 23:00:16 ‹Risky_Stud› if it is?
18/11/2010 23:00:19 ‹TheForgivenOne› Does it appear to be?
18/11/2010 23:00:27 ‹theherkman› Does that mean that if I want to say, "Hi, how are you." I need to post that in help?
18/11/2010 23:00:36 ‹theherkman› Cause that's a question.
18/11/2010 23:00:52 ‹Risky_Stud› I'm not sure
18/11/2010 23:01:32 ‹InsomniaRed›
18/11/2010 23:01:43 ‹theherkman›
18/11/2010 23:02:08 ‹TheForgivenOne› Well I caused enough havoc for my short time here, so I shall be on my way
18/11/2010 23:02:25 ‹theherkman› Time to PARTY!
18/11/2010 23:02:29 ‹theherkman› :dance::dance::dance::dance:
18/11/2010 23:02:33 ‹theherkman› :-^:-^:-^
18/11/2010 23:02:55 ‹Risky_Stud› that's definetly not a question
18/11/2010 23:03:11 * TheForgivenOne quit
18/11/2010 23:03:14 ‹theherkman› Then it belongs here.
18/11/2010 23:03:15 ‹theherkman›
18/11/2010 23:04:05 ‹InsomniaRed› theherkman, please don't begin to spam either.
18/11/2010 23:04:05 ‹InsomniaRed› theherkman, please don't begin to spam either.
18/11/2010 23:04:22 ‹theherkman› I haven't/
18/11/2010 23:04:39 ‹theherkman› I said it was time to party and then started to dance and wistle.
18/11/2010 23:04:45 ‹theherkman› *Whistle.
18/11/2010 23:04:50 ‹theherkman› Is that spamming?
18/11/2010 23:04:52 ‹theherkman› Seriously?
18/11/2010 23:05:10 ‹InsomniaRed› I said don't begin to spam. It is the beginning of it, yes.
18/11/2010 23:05:35 ‹theherkman› I don't think so. I think I am feeling happy and am allowed to dance and whistle.:dance::-^:dance::-^

Hmmm. If you replace the 'spam' with 'be annoying' then I guess I can see her point.

[john9blue]

Doesn't it suck when you like two people that hate each other? And both of them assume that you're on their side?

[denominator]

Exactly, I mean I don't have a problem with Saxlad. I think he's a great guy. Granted, I don't know much about him personally. But I do know that rdsrds2120 is a 16 year old little boy. I mean come on. Have you ever known a 16 year old kid to make good decisions or admit that they are wrong?

JM2C

In all fairness, you're now stereotyping. I have no doubt that there are 16 year old boys out there that can do a great job of moderating, or 20 year old girls. But to discriminate against them being moderators just on their age and sex is actually worse than what Juan got banned for.

However, I still think all moderators should be judged on their abilities, and should or shouldn't be selected based on that more than the age/sex demographic that they fit into.

You're right, it is sterotyping. Now, have you known a 16 year old male to make it a habit to admit they are wrong or not want control/power over others? If so, is this common? Thus the reason for the sterotype. Like most democrats spending more than most republicans. Or most republicans lowering taxes or allowing tax breaks. Sterotypes can be true. Can they not?

Yes, definitely. If stereotypes weren't true most of the time, they wouldn't be stereotypes.

But at the same time, I only know the age/sex of a handful of moderators here, and to say that all of the ones in a certain demographic are going to perform poorly is way off base. You said it yourself with the democrat/republican example: most.

[theherkman]

Okay, so let me rephrase, which I believe was my point anyway... MOST 16 year old little boys act like power hungry egomaniacs that are always right. Better?

[jonesthecurl]

16ist!

[Juan_Bottom]

Doesn't it suck when you like two people that hate each other? And both of them assume that you're on their side?

Who are we talking about? Because I KNOW that you're on my side. Or else.



STILL NO WORD ON THE TICKET... IT IS CONFIRMED THAT THE ADMIN HAS BEEN SITTING ON IT. They don't respect their own system.

I don't remember the LC mods being so anal...

That and it's LC...Who cares? I mean, honestly, in some ways you got the annoying dudes who just continue spewing the same stuff over and over (That is spam) but if it's just a couple messages that contain a sentence in itself it's really not consider spam, cause I've had a nasty habit of doin that while I was there. I think people need to educate themselves a tad bit more and learn what's what...

That or get the stick out of your ass and be a bit more...Idk...Relaxed? Sure you're trusted with said job, but it's really not paying any bills unless it simply feeds your ego then in that case have a blast and be hated lol.

I think what I'm trying to say is...Get people who are actually mature about this sort of area...Stop giving kids these titles no matter how meager it seems...Give it to someone who probably has more free time on their hands and is a bit more experienced in the world around them. Clappers a fine example, never had a problem with her and what not, and good lord, how long as she been a mod? Close enough to when this site first started. I'm just throwing that out there that currently the mod selection skills suck some mean nuts.

The oddest part about LC is that there are MODs in there at all. Lack could save some premie money if he just axed them all. All the other chat rooms that I go into are moderator-less. You just type /ignore [insert name] and the problem goes away. Of course, if it's really bad someone can always go and find a MOD.

[Preditor]

/ignore [Juan_Bottom]

[BigBallinStalin]

/ignore [Juan_Bottom]

**while pointing his thumb**

HEY, who's the new guy?

[Juan_Bottom]

What happened to his "friend or foe you're choice" post?

Anyway, some updates.
STILL NO WORD ON MY TICKET.

Also, Darwins_Bane was talked to by admin and told to be more careful with bannings in the future. That's right. Admin admits that the banning was unjustified, they just wont do it in public or admit it to me. I don't get what they have against the truth? When I've been wrong, I've admitted to it. I created a whole thread titled "Times when you were wrong on the internet" just so I could. It went 6 pages in OT but thegreekdog was the only Mod to admit to ever having made a mistake.

I talked to Darwin myself personally. He still thinks his actions were correct, though he agrees that he had to interpret what I said as racist. I think he's misguided, but I wouldn't go so far as to call him a liar like I would Insom or Admin. He's not so bad. Also, A few of you have been asking about this:

Why do Muslims make threats and violence whenever they are offended by an action such as depicting Muhammed or burning their bibles yet some countries do these same things toward Christianity on a frequent basis? If it's okay for Iranians to burn the bible and crosses, why isn't it ok for others to burn the koran?

Personally I think it was a misguided post, and the bigotry that you could read into here was unintentionally intentional. It was more of a generalization than a post hating all Muslims or anything. Although yeah, I agree that it was far worse than what I said, and yes the former Mod said all Muslims make threats of violence. I didn't miss that. You're right to point out that it is a crime that I got banned for much less and the former MOD who posted this got the benefit of the doubt.
Here's the benefit of the doubt:

The Discussion/Global Mods and I discussed X's post. While we can see why for some of our Community Members might see it as Bigotry, it seems more like an uneducated over-generalization rather than anything bigoted.

So here's some rubber boots to help you wade through all Insomnia & admin's bullshit.

[nietzsche]

Juan, I can tell you right now, you can't win this.

The reason they can do anything they want is that they are free, and lack can't afford payed mods. He's happy with them because somehow they do the work and they know they can f*ck up plenty before having to say "I'm sorry I fucked up".

They are on fire tho, this and AoG's ban are pure bullshit. Still, if you get any of them to apologize to you, you'll be my CC hero.

[BigBallinStalin]

So here's some rubber boots to help you wade through all Insomnia & admin's bullshit.

Thanks! <pulls boots on>

But we're gonna need more than that

[notyou2]

/ignore [Juan_Bottom]

**while pointing his thumb**

HEY, who's the new guy?

My guess, a 12 year old that can't spell predator.

[ljex]

What happened to his "friend or foe you're choice" post?

Anyway, some updates.
STILL NO WORD ON MY TICKET.

Also, Darwins_Bane was talked to by admin and told to be more careful with bannings in the future. That's right. Admin admits that the banning was unjustified, they just wont do it in public or admit it to me. I don't get what they have against the truth? When I've been wrong, I've admitted to it. I created a whole thread titled "Times when you were wrong on the internet" just so I could. It went 6 pages in OT but thegreekdog was the only Mod to admit to ever having made a mistake.

I have admired to my fair share of mistakes as a moderator...i just dont browse SIB that often and was unaware of that thread. Most of them in my early days but i still make mistakes every now and then...but hey everyone is human give us a break?

Juan, I can tell you right now, you can't win this.

The reason they can do anything they want is that they are free, and lack can't afford payed mods. He's happy with them because somehow they do the work and they know they can f*ck up plenty before having to say "I'm sorry I fucked up".

They are on fire tho, this and AoG's ban are pure bullshit. Still, if you get any of them to apologize to you, you'll be my CC hero.

Oh and so you can be nietzsche's hero, I'm sorry for whatever it is that i should be sorry for.

Also on your chat ban, I have talked to insomnia about this and she has assured me that there is more too this before whatever screen shot was posted in here. Either way that "joke" was uncalled for in my opinion, I think the problem is that the official mod warning of don't do that again came 1 second before you used the same type of joke again, and as a result you didn't really have a proper warning. Had it been say 5-10 seconds i would think of the ban for just that as warranted...as you were told not to continue and still did. As it is the ban for just the screen shot is iffy and i could see how a mod would go both ways either banning you or not banning you and justify it. That said i trust when insomniared tells me that there is more to the ban, i just figure i would give my thoughts on what has been provided on evidence.

[BigBallinStalin]

She'd be more likely to say whatever in order to not admit to any mistake on her part.

[theherkman]

No! She is going to look like a FLAME REMOVEDand tell everyone she is sorry and FLAME REMOVED. No shit she is going to FLAME REMOVED.

[Juan_Bottom]

I have admired to my fair share of mistakes as a moderator...i just dont browse SIB that often and was unaware of that thread. Most of them in my early days but i still make mistakes every now and then...but hey everyone is human give us a break?

I don't mind that, we just think it's bullsh*t that Darwin was told by admin that my ban was unwarranted ('don't ban anyone for that again'), but they wont overturn it.

Also on your chat ban, I have talked to insomnia about this and she has assured me that there is more too this before whatever screen shot was posted in here.

Yeah, but you gotta take a step back and put this into perspective. You gotta start from the beginning. If I was acting inappropriately earlier in chat isn't it likely that one of the competent Mods in there would have warned me sooner? I've never been warned in my whole chat history. From the very beginning Insomnia refused to tell me even why I was even banned! I disclosed everything that I had believed happened (from memory) to the public to force her hand. I've been extremely honest from the start. I eventually had to go to Darwin to find out why I was banned, and he thinks I was banned for racism. I then posted the chat log that is the evidence used against me. As I predicted, Insomnia tried to take the emphasis off of racism, and say that I was trolling. The case against me is insanely weak, so Insomnia has invented a story where I was trolling earlier in chat. The problem with giving InsomniaRed the benefit of the doubt is that I've been honest from the very start and she hasn't. Furthermore, how can anyone argue their innocence if you allow for secret or even unrecorded evidence to be used against them? Isn't it her job to provide all of the evidence as to why she banned someone? Do Mods even need evidence anymore? She and Darwin don't even seem to agree on why I was banned. That's why Insomnia refused to tell me why I was banned; she didn't have a good reason and knew that If she shared it with me that I would expose her as a liar.

Either way that "joke" was uncalled for in my opinion,

You, or anyone else is more than welcome to explain just how it was a racist joke. It was an incomplete comment about a culture, not a race. To look around and see racism where it isn't is to be a racist yourself.
I wasn't banned for making racist jokes, I was banned because Darwin had interpreted it as racist. I never got to argue anything different before I was banned. You can clearly read me saying "WTF are you talking about Darwin" in the chat log. He didn't answer either.

That said i trust when insomniared tells me that there is more to the ban, i just figure i would give my thoughts on what has been provided on evidence.

I keep hearing this (only from Mods - once again it's the Mods VS the public) and it's utter bullsh*t. How can you give the benefit of the doubt to someone who's been lying from the start? I've told nothing but the truth and my story hasn't changed. I can't argue against secret or non-existent evidence. These statements are as shallow as they come. You know, she said that I was lying when I posted from memory, but I guess it's ok though when she remembers times that I trolled and she didn't even give me a warning.
Here's some quote's from Insomnia about why it's not fair that I use evidence based on memory:

Your 'evidence' was a poorly transcribed, biased version of the parts you 'remember'.

I am sorry we didn't do what you did and write things up to the best of our memory, as that would look unprofessional.

Yet somehow it's ok if she uses her memories to judge me...

And anyway, one thing that we're really lacking her is some Mod insight as to how they interpret what I said as racism. So if you want to post about how you'd interpret it you're more than welcome to. If you compare my quote to "the former Mods" quote mine looks about as innocent as it gets.

[Juan_Bottom]

I want to add though, for ljex or any other Mod willing to come in here and make a stated opinion on the controversy, that I have a firm respect for that at least. It can't be easy to defend Insomnia in the forum where the professional arguers (and one great Pun maker) live and battle.

[jonesthecurl]

Perhaps it could be stated exactly what JB did, instead of just "You KNOW" - 'cos he doesn't seem to and we all don't.
I don't want to find I'm banned cos I mention Madagascar or pork scratchings or rush hour or something - could be anything at the moment.

[Juan_Bottom]

^Que the great Pun maker! lol

[jonesthecurl]

I think you've been punnished enough now.

[nagerous]

Seriously, this ban ended ages ago, it was only for 72 hours! Why are you still acting like some kind of crazed martyr that has been the first person ever in society to have possibly been maltreated in a certain way. Not to mention that you received your ban actually for trolling, which there was great justification for.

You are now just using this thread for you and buddies such as 'herkman' to take pipeshots and baits at insomnia. This thread should've been locked ages ago, there is no flame wars on this site any more.

[nietzsche]

Seriously, this ban ended ages ago, it was only for 72 hours! Why are you still acting like some kind of crazed martyr that has been the first person ever in society to have possibly been maltreated in a certain way. Not to mention that you received your ban actually for trolling, which there was great justification for.

You are now just using this thread for you and buddies such as 'herkman' to take pipeshots and baits at insomnia. This thread should've been locked ages ago, there is no flame wars on this site any more.

You are not thinking with your big head.

[Juan_Bottom]

>If you're wondering what nag has invested in this look at his location. "InsomniaRed"<


It isn't the ban that is the focus here, it's bad moderating and lying. I've evidenced pretty well that Insomnia is lying. And that Admin is lying and protecting her. They admitted quietly to themselves that her banning me was unjustified. They told Darwin to be more careful in the future. But they wont lift the ban or even respond to my ticket. Why should we go quietly?

I received the ban for racism and trolling. You can read Darwin's PM to me that says I was banned for racism. You can read Insomnia's PM telling me I was banned for racism and trolling. Insomnia has tried to focus on trolling that she apparently didn't screencap to try to take the focus off the racism. Banning me for trolling is even worse than banning me for racism... There's no proof that I ever trolled anyone. I even predicted that she would try that trick. She never warned me about trolling, and she didn't save any evidence that I ever did. In court, that bullsh*t would be thrown the hell out.