Conquer Club

The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AgentSmith88 on Tue Jul 14, 2009 6:48 pm

You know, I didn't really care one way or the other about the banning because I haven't had any problems with being banned. However, after reading the "Forum Guidelines" and seeing that basically typing ANYTHING can get you banned, I'm a little bit pissed off. I found this under trolling and thought it was pertinent:

"•Don't flog a dead horse. If a discussion is over, it's over. Screaming louder, more or in a different place is not going to change the answer already given. If you think the answer was wrong, PM an Admin. If you think the admin is wrong, then this probably isn't the right community for you."
Captain AgentSmith88
 
Posts: 639
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:49 pm
Location: West Michigan

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby Woodruff on Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:11 pm

AgentSmith88 wrote:You know, I didn't really care one way or the other about the banning because I haven't had any problems with being banned. However, after reading the "Forum Guidelines" and seeing that basically typing ANYTHING can get you banned, I'm a little bit pissed off. I found this under trolling and thought it was pertinent:

"•Don't flog a dead horse. If a discussion is over, it's over. Screaming louder, more or in a different place is not going to change the answer already given. If you think the answer was wrong, PM an Admin. If you think the admin is wrong, then this probably isn't the right community for you."


While I agree with the spirit of those sentences, I would absolutely agree that it needs to be re-worded.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby 4myGod on Tue Jul 14, 2009 8:41 pm

clapper011 wrote: you are so wrong 4mygod, I am a member before a moderator. And I AM NOT 2 people...LOL no one person can be 2 people as you stated

Obviously I didn't mean 2 people literally...

clapper011 wrote:
4myGod wrote:Come on now clapper. Don't take this so personal. You guys can suggest things as well, but when your suggestions to ban a user get put into action without any reasonable reason from the viewpoint of the community, your opinions and suggestions will be in question.

I beg to differ, if I didn't be somewhat emotional in my moderating, for
1) it wouldn't be me.
2) I would be cold and uncaring
3) I would be like a robot........ and I very much doubt users on this site would want to be moderated by a robot that would read EVERYTHING that possibly could be taken as wrong (be it a topic that looked like spam etc) closely related to the guidelines as against them.......
so excuse me for taking your bitter words as a personal attack on all moderators, even if we had absolutely NOTHING TO DO with dm's ban!


You need to be like a robot. A lot of the complaining we get is because people think certain people are getting off the hook while others are getting punished. We need standards and everyone punished equally according to the rules. Yes as the rules are now they are too general so we would all be breaking them if we set a robot lose. So the rules need to be reworded and more specific and the moderators need to be like robots.

Your feelings are going to cloud your judgement. One person may get off the hook just because as a user your personal relationship with him is higher, whereas someone else may not get off the hook because you may or may not like him.

Yes, many of us want DM back, however that's not the issue I am bringing up in this post. The issue is the current guidelines and how the moderating team is doing their job. The community is speaking up, in several posts unfortunately, about things they are unhappy with. The reasons they bring up are valid, and many of the other users (who know what's going on) agree, even Woodruff on certain occassions.

Pride, feelings, emotions, likes, dislikes... all this needs to be taken out of your moderation. This stuff should be left in your user body (not literally a separate body). Punishing 1 person by strictly following the escalating system and not punishing someone else the same way is unfair.

I work at a high school here, and the real trouble makers are usually the most friendly and willing to speak English outside of the class room. Now it would be unfair for me to let them get away with more, or punish them less just because I like them more. I still need to punish them for smoking in the bathroom the same way I would punish anyone else.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class 4myGod
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:03 am

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue Jul 14, 2009 8:47 pm

Woodruff wrote:
AgentSmith88 wrote:You know, I didn't really care one way or the other about the banning because I haven't had any problems with being banned. However, after reading the "Forum Guidelines" and seeing that basically typing ANYTHING can get you banned, I'm a little bit pissed off. I found this under trolling and thought it was pertinent:

"•Don't flog a dead horse. If a discussion is over, it's over. Screaming louder, more or in a different place is not going to change the answer already given. If you think the answer was wrong, PM an Admin. If you think the admin is wrong, then this probably isn't the right community for you."


While I agree with the spirit of those sentences, I would absolutely agree that it needs to be re-worded.


The biggest problem with that wording is that many things people like to discuss come up again and again and again .. in discussion. Maybe new people join in, maybe just a slightly different perspective and sometimes... well a lot of discussions do wind up with "is there God" or "what is right and wrong". These are questions to which there really is no one, set, universal answer and so, while the horse might be dead for some, it is never fully gone.

On the other hand, I don't think anyone really likes reading the 1,000,000th "the dice are rigged" thread or "so and so is %$#&&*" over and over and over.

I would suggest that perhaps the standard should differ in "Suggs and Bugs, GD, etc." and the discussion/social forums.

To a point, the best answer to someone who is debating something you don't like is simply to ignore them. I would say that in some cases, that is really the best response to some complaints (and yes, I am quite sure that response is given at times).

However, this is yet another divergeance from the perma-ban issue.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AgentSmith88 on Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:46 pm

That wasn't really my point, although you make a good one. The point I was trying to make was the bolded part, about how if you have a problem you should pm an admin and if you aren't satisfied after that then tough shit. (or at least that's how it's worded) So basically if the admin you pm doesn't agree with you then you are screwed.
Captain AgentSmith88
 
Posts: 639
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:49 pm
Location: West Michigan

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:03 pm

AgentSmith88 wrote:That wasn't really my point, although you make a good one. The point I was trying to make was the bolded part, about how if you have a problem you should pm an admin and if you aren't satisfied after that then tough shit. (or at least that's how it's worded) So basically if the admin you pm doesn't agree with you then you are screwed.

Actually, I agree with that point, too. I definitely understand that mods (who are all volunteers, etc.) don't want to keep fielding complaints about other mods, etc. I think appeals need to be fairly narrow and, perhaps (?) there should be consequences for someone who just won't accept an answer they don't like (as opposed to respectfully disagreeing, countering points that did not seem to be considered, etc.), to make sure only serious appeals are made, but "no appeals" does seem a bit much.

Then again, this is a fun, mostly light, gaming site with discussion that ranges from philosophy to plain outright joking. So, either you have fun or ... well, you'll leave.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby hookshotwillaby on Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:18 pm

The ones i've noticed having fun here have all been asked to leave at one time or another. What is that?
Private 1st Class hookshotwillaby
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:22 pm
Location: Ft. Worth

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby Woodruff on Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:27 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
AgentSmith88 wrote:You know, I didn't really care one way or the other about the banning because I haven't had any problems with being banned. However, after reading the "Forum Guidelines" and seeing that basically typing ANYTHING can get you banned, I'm a little bit pissed off. I found this under trolling and thought it was pertinent:

"•Don't flog a dead horse. If a discussion is over, it's over. Screaming louder, more or in a different place is not going to change the answer already given. If you think the answer was wrong, PM an Admin. If you think the admin is wrong, then this probably isn't the right community for you."


While I agree with the spirit of those sentences, I would absolutely agree that it needs to be re-worded.


The biggest problem with that wording is that many things people like to discuss come up again and again and again .. in discussion. Maybe new people join in, maybe just a slightly different perspective and sometimes... well a lot of discussions do wind up with "is there God" or "what is right and wrong". These are questions to which there really is no one, set, universal answer and so, while the horse might be dead for some, it is never fully gone.

On the other hand, I don't think anyone really likes reading the 1,000,000th "the dice are rigged" thread or "so and so is %$#&&*" over and over and over.

I would suggest that perhaps the standard should differ in "Suggs and Bugs, GD, etc." and the discussion/social forums.

To a point, the best answer to someone who is debating something you don't like is simply to ignore them. I would say that in some cases, that is really the best response to some complaints (and yes, I am quite sure that response is given at times).

However, this is yet another divergeance from the perma-ban issue.


My problem with it is more to the "my way or the highway" feel to it. It doesn't NEED to be worded that way...yet it is. And, I fear, it accurately reflects perhaps the moderator perspective here and that's NOT a good thing.

My butt is pretty firmly planted on the side of good behavior and following the rules...and yet, I DO think that there should be room for discussion with the moderators during "problem times". I can speak for my own situation in that when I was recently banned for 24 hours for what was, in my mind, a really pretty silly reason, I attempted to open up a dialogue with Andy (who was apparently the "buster" in my case) about it. I even started out the dialogue by stating that I accepted the ban and wasn't trying to argue my way out of it and that I just wanted to talk. Being the really wordy guy that I am, I had a (as you might imagine) pretty long-winded post to him, to which I received, if I recall, a one-line response. At most, it was two lines. So I responded to that with basically an "I'm disappointed that's all you have to say when I wanted a discussion" and received an almost identically-worded response again.

I wasn't trying to get out of anything...I was taking responsibility for having broken the rules in the moderator's view. But I couldn't even get a discussion going about the issue? Surely, my generally good behavior would have earned SOMETHING? I think that's a pretty big problem.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby Woodruff on Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:29 pm

hookshotwillaby wrote:The ones i've noticed having fun here have all been asked to leave at one time or another. What is that?


What "that" is...is a very strong mis-perception, in my opinion.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby jiminski on Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:12 am

Woodruff wrote:
hookshotwillaby wrote:The ones i've noticed having fun here have all been asked to leave at one time or another. What is that?


What "that" is...is a very strong mis-perception, in my opinion.



it is a mild misconception. Some/Many of the Permabans were certainly justified.. i am not going to detail my opinion on all as they are so subjective.

the reality around here is that there is an innate truth to the sentiment in Hooks words. That's important, as if we are to have a Forum community, then the best characters (often the naughty ones) draw in the punters and keep us here; to the Forums, they are as important as great map makers are to the game!

There is something else to consider too.. i keep harping on about 'dynamics' and 'all of us having roles to play' but that is as important here as the interdependence of ecosystems.. which, unpleasant though it sounds, need: Grazers, (your average 'QFT' quoter and Christian Democrat); hunters (like Dancing Mustard) and Bacteria to clean up the shit after both of them (Andy, OP, Clapp etc... hehe maybe Woodruff soon ;) ).

No one is ever going to wax lyrical about the humble bacteria but they are the beginning life and more than likely the end of life. But for the beauty.. for the majestic vigour of the hunt, which we all grip our seats for and pulse in joyful blood-lust, we need a lion or two.

The importance of our finely balanced ecosystem is quite plain within the realm of entertainment (which is all this over-inflated little society is all about isn't it .. sometimes we all forget that) but to maintain that we all invest a lot of time and effort. In doing so we also need this mutl-layered cast of predators, prey and shit collectors.
What the predators do is lead the attack, often viciously and often indiscriminately but they get in there, mix it up and ensure the grazers don't eat all the bloody grass.

The hunters, with scent of blood in their nostrils; kill, target the weak, and to drop the tired metaphor for a moment, champion all anti-establishment causes.
Indiscriminately perhaps but they get in and weaken the resolve of the conservatives and the upholders of the status quo. By doing so, some will say they take resources away from the site and weaken the whole site. (But of course the grazers will say that; they only want to eat all the grass in peace, till there is none left.)
In truth, what the hunters and the trail-blazers do is cause mayhem, the best of them (Mustard has to be included) do so with the shield of logic; for if they are not logical they can not be effective in their pursuit of sport. And then, once the dust settles on our African plane, it is left to the omnivore's .. (sometimes people like me, when i am not feeling too irritable towards the site) those with the scent of the kill but who graze a little too. The boring people with the pragmatism to see/care enough for the broader picture, to come in and finish off bones of the debate.

My point is, this place would be only full of masticating grazers without people like Mustard. Then, when the place is full to the brim with ruminant faeces and no grass is left, the bacteria will turn on the dead carcasses of the emaciated sheep .. and then.. only JR will be left, reading his CC CV, quietly in the corner to himself ;)

So the site and the community needs to get this right; the naughty ones, with a view to revolution, are vital and if you limit their ability to protest via accumulated minor infraction and permaban the site will lose in the long-run.
The omnivores need indiscriminate hunters to go in first to satisfy their objectivity and reticence. Without the objectors, make-up sex and compromise will not be possible...
... but i will not be helping.
Image
User avatar
Captain jiminski
 
Posts: 5422
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby notyou2 on Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:00 am

I have a solution to all this.....appoint DM et al as forum moderators.
Problem solved.
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby jiminski on Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:26 am

notyou2 wrote:I have a solution to all this.....appoint DM et al as forum moderators.
Problem solved.



Mustard moderates on another site and does an exceedingly good job.

.. but People have different faces in different places.
We slot into the available niches which suit aspects of our persona and our environment.

I actually like the modding here often ..... sometimes at least ; )
But People who say: "oooh you don't know you're born you lot.. you get away with murder!" "you should see what it's like with no mods over there.. Anarchy! i tell you! Anarchy!"

They completely miss the point, as we do not have to settle for second best or one or the other. the reason that we have a good site .. (though we must ensure not to balls it up!) is due to the vying interest groups and niche persona's.

It is due to a mild culture of irreverence and the strength the mods show in tending it without ending it. what this is about is the natural mod predisposition to make an easier life for themselves which will fundamentally change the face of the site and create irrevocable damage.
Image
User avatar
Captain jiminski
 
Posts: 5422
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby MeDeFe on Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:29 am

notyou2 wrote:I have a solution to all this.....appoint DM et al as forum moderators.
Problem solved.

That could lead to great hilarity in more than one way, it might gloriously succeed or miserably fail, but it would certainly not be run-of-the-mill.


Back to topic. jiminski put it quite poetically, but I do agree with him and expressed a similar sentiment in an earlier post, we need some strife and conflict between different personalities or the fora will become utterly boring, the moderators' job is not to throw out those they perceive as troublemakers like bouncers at a nightclub, but to moderate the conflict.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:05 pm

Agreed the Moderators are for moderating conflicts. That is why Administrators, the club managers, are involved with high up disciplinary actions like the removal from the club.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby thegreekdog on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:12 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:Agreed the Moderators are for moderating conflicts. That is why Administrators, the club managers, are involved with high up disciplinary actions like the removal from the club.


--Andy


Is there a requirement that there must be a complaint before disciplinary action is initiated? In other words, if Player A is trolling, is that Player disciplined regardless of whether another player makes a complaint? If so, maybe we can make that part of a revised rule set - "In cases of minor infractions (trolling, etc.), discipline will not be meted out unless the alleged offender has been formally accused by another member of the community."
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:18 pm

There is no specific on whether something is reported or whether it is found via moderating the Forum.

However, I think the largest part of things we deal with are reported, mostly via the Reported Posts feature. Very few things are found from simply a moderator "stumbling onto something" ---since we have so many eyes in the community reporting things. We average a relatively large number of reported posts a day.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby thegreekdog on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:21 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:There is no specific on whether something is reported or whether it is found via moderating the Forum.

However, I think the largest part of things we deal with are reported, mostly via the Reported Posts feature. Very few things are found from simply a moderator "stumbling onto something" ---since we have so many eyes in the community reporting things. We average a relatively large number of reported posts a day.


--Andy


Are most of these "post-reports" made on an anonymous basis? I tend to frequent the C&A section and I rarely see reports on posts (mostly multis or chat abuse).
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:26 pm

I think you misunderstood what I meant by "Reported Posts." The Forum Software allows users to "report posts" -- see the "!" icon located near the Quote Button? This notifys Moderators and Admins, who have access to Moderation in that specific forum or all forums, depending on their level, to see Reported Posts.

Reported posts don't often get reported in the "Cheating and Abuse Reports" Forum---since they have their own built in forum software.

I hope that makes sense, and I hope I didn't misunderstand you!


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby thegreekdog on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:31 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:I think you misunderstood what I meant by "Reported Posts." The Forum Software allows users to "report posts" -- see the "!" icon located near the Quote Button? This notifys Moderators and Admins, who have access to Moderation in that specific forum or all forums, depending on their level, to see Reported Posts.

Reported posts don't often get reported in the "Cheating and Abuse Reports" Forum---since they have their own built in forum software.

I hope that makes sense, and I hope I didn't misunderstand you!


--Andy


No, I got you now. Sorry for the ignorance there. As you can tell, I've never reported someone for a bad post. Makes sense I guess. Takes a lot of the transparency out of the process. I'm not sure if that's a good thing.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:33 pm

It's actually quite a helpful tool for Moderation---which is why I assume something as big as phpBB has it as a feature.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:40 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:It's actually quite a helpful tool for Moderation---which is why I assume something as big as phpBB has it as a feature.


--Andy

I was actually looking for that button a while ago. I don't report many, but the ones I have reported needed quick attention. It used to say "report this post" I did not know what the triangle meant.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:43 pm

If you hover over any icon, a description of the icon will become available!

But most of this discussion is Off Topic from the original topic.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby Woodruff on Wed Jul 15, 2009 2:03 pm

jiminski wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
hookshotwillaby wrote:The ones i've noticed having fun here have all been asked to leave at one time or another. What is that?


What "that" is...is a very strong mis-perception, in my opinion.


it is a mild misconception.


You actually believe that it's only a mild misperception to state that the ones having fun on the site are the ones that are being asked to leave? I'm surprised to hear ANYONE say that...because if there are THAT many people "not having fun here"...

thegreekdog wrote:Is there a requirement that there must be a complaint before disciplinary action is initiated? In other words, if Player A is trolling, is that Player disciplined regardless of whether another player makes a complaint? If so, maybe we can make that part of a revised rule set - "In cases of minor infractions (trolling, etc.), discipline will not be meted out unless the alleged offender has been formally accused by another member of the community."


That makes sense.

thegreekdog wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:I think you misunderstood what I meant by "Reported Posts." The Forum Software allows users to "report posts" -- see the "!" icon located near the Quote Button? This notifys Moderators and Admins, who have access to Moderation in that specific forum or all forums, depending on their level, to see Reported Posts.

Reported posts don't often get reported in the "Cheating and Abuse Reports" Forum---since they have their own built in forum software.

I hope that makes sense, and I hope I didn't misunderstand you!


No, I got you now. Sorry for the ignorance there. As you can tell, I've never reported someone for a bad post. Makes sense I guess. Takes a lot of the transparency out of the process. I'm not sure if that's a good thing.


C&A might become almost unmanageable if reported posts were to go there, as well. (not to mention people having difficulty creating links to posts and such things as that, which the reported-posts feature takes care of for them).
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby jiminski on Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:15 pm

Woodruff wrote:
jiminski wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
hookshotwillaby wrote:The ones i've noticed having fun here have all been asked to leave at one time or another. What is that?


What "that" is...is a very strong mis-perception, in my opinion.


it is a mild misconception.


You actually believe that it's only a mild misperception to state that the ones having fun on the site are the ones that are being asked to leave? I'm surprised to hear ANYONE say that...because if there are THAT many people "not having fun here"...





heh, jesus Wood! that is your worst case of selective quoting yet!.. Did you read the first bit and lurch into repost!? ;)


it is akin to:

Woodruff wrote: ... many people "not having fun here"...

Image
User avatar
Captain jiminski
 
Posts: 5422
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London

Re: The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

Postby Woodruff on Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:19 pm

jiminski wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
jiminski wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
hookshotwillaby wrote:The ones i've noticed having fun here have all been asked to leave at one time or another. What is that?


What "that" is...is a very strong mis-perception, in my opinion.


it is a mild misconception.


You actually believe that it's only a mild misperception to state that the ones having fun on the site are the ones that are being asked to leave? I'm surprised to hear ANYONE say that...because if there are THAT many people "not having fun here"...


heh, jesus Wood! that is your worst case of selective quoting yet!.. Did you read the first bit and lurch into repost!? ;)


No...you made a statement, and then provided supporting information for that perspective. You even stated "the innate truth of hooks' words" (or something to that effect).

So now I'm quite confused. What exactly was your position regarding "the ones having fun on the site are the ones that are being asked to leave", because I thought you were disagreeing with me when I read your post, but your response here seems to indicate that you weren't disagreeing with me.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

PreviousNext

Return to Conquer Club Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users