Discussion Moderators: Until When?

by **BGtheBrain** on Wed May 16, 2012 10:15 am

Yes Woodruff was baited by a proven multi and banned pretty quickly.

Why the f*ck does it take over 2 months to make a damn decision about your posts?

by **Night Strike** on Wed May 16, 2012 10:17 am

pimpdave wrote:I don't call you a violent racist, I might say sometimes that you support acts of racism or violence. And I can always back that assessment up with posts you've made.

Your threads on the Tea Party being a violent and racist organization are rarely backed up by actual proof of racism or violence that is actually tied to the Tea Party. And you can't cite any posts of mine supporting violence (because I don't support acts of violence in public or on here), and the only way any of my posts can be considered racist is by taking them out of context. Please return with facts.

by **pimpdave** on Wed May 16, 2012 10:18 am

And Woodruff has been banned for say things just like that in the past, to other people, who he also claimed were baiting him. To bait Woodruff, one only has to disagree with him. So it's not really baiting. Just like with Night Strike. His definition of trolling is to post something he disagrees with.

by **Night Strike** on Wed May 16, 2012 10:19 am

pimpdave wrote:Just like with Night Strike. His definition of trolling is to post something he disagrees with.

Incorrect.

by **pimpdave** on Wed May 16, 2012 10:20 am

Night Strike wrote:
pimpdave wrote:I don't call you a violent racist, I might say sometimes that you support acts of racism or violence. And I can always back that assessment up with posts you've made.

Your threads on the Tea Party being a violent and racist organization are rarely backed up by actual proof of racism or violence that is actually tied to the Tea Party. And you can't cite any posts of mine supporting violence (because I don't support acts of violence in public or on here), and the only way any of my posts can be considered racist is by taking them out of context. Please return with facts.

I'm not going to bother digging through posts to find where I've questioned your support of racism. But you have done it. My posts about the Tea Party are always backed up, so please return with facts on that one. My criticisms of the Tea Party being a violent, racist organization aren't about you. So that's weird that you're saying you're one and the same with the Tea Party. Is there something you're concealing that you want to share with us, Night Strike? About your involvement with racist, violent Tea Party actions, perhaps?

But you're just derailing this. You flame people. That's something you do. Why is that okay?

by **thegreekdog** on Wed May 16, 2012 10:38 am

This thread has descended far enough.

by **whitestazn88** on Wed May 16, 2012 12:19 pm

Please proceed with the discussion from the prequel, "Discussion Moderators: Until When?"

I for one, while clearly biased, feel that PD raises valid points. But also, in light of the very very very stupidly vague rules by which members of this "community" can be banned, those who oppose him also have valid points.

Main argument: why don't we just ease back the stupid rules? Or possibly stop having moderators, and just let a computer censor all the "bad words". Clearly the report system is easily abused. Clearly there are many disagreements in the forums. I just don't see why it's fair though that some members can openly plot out how and why they want to have someone banned based on a personal vendetta, and have no consequence. Isn't that what happened with woody? That's dumb. Y'all dumb. Libertarianism in the forums, yo.

by **Haggis_McMutton** on Wed May 16, 2012 12:36 pm

by **maxfaraday** on Wed May 16, 2012 12:54 pm

by **maxfaraday** on Wed May 16, 2012 1:50 pm

Here we go again...

Sent: Wed May 16, 2012 1:40 pm
From: pimpdave
To: maxfaraday
Subject: Discussion Moderators: Until When 2: Until Whener?

Dude, by the way, I still think it sucks you got banned. I didn't want that to happen, I wasn't trying to make that happen at all, and I think it's dumb that you keep blaming me for it.

We should be friends. I'm sure you're pretty cool, despite liking a girls' game like soccer.

by **vodean** on Wed May 16, 2012 2:37 pm

PD and woody were both trolls. perhaps the incidents that got them banned were a little uh... mild? but they were just the straws that broke their respective camel's backs. hence forum bans.

also, libertarianism in the forums and out! R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution

by **Neoteny** on Wed May 16, 2012 3:58 pm

The whenening.

by **nietzsche** on Wed May 16, 2012 7:38 pm

I just want to post here this:

pimpdave wrote:Or will the mods lock this thread down now too? Why is it okay for Nietzsche to post attack threads (like he did on PLAYER not too long ago), but someone calling out conservatives and having Night Strike answer gets a thread locked? viewtopic.php?f=8&t=170985

False.

My thread was a joke, it was not understood by a couple persons, I think it was Woodruff who pointed that out, and I apologized to him, I also apologized to Player of course, who hadn't even seen the thread. I was typing a public apology when nagerous, with reason, locked the thread.

But this only shows that pimpdave has taken the time to read my posts, looking for some dirt. I guess my ban is coming since he must have reported a couple.