logo Sign In

What should be bannable offenses on Originaltrilogy forums?

Author
Date
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
This is a new thread just for the discussion of what people should be banned for here at OT.

In the thread titled China I had responded about a graphic of a chart that I had posted in relation to the course of a debate on global warming. In the response I said:

FanFiltration said:

I would like to direct you to a great web tool that will help label and classify the "logical fallacies" employed by many of our forum members. This tool is for people such as myself that enjoy baiting, and also observing the types of debate tactics, reactions, and over reactions employed by the posters here. With this reference tool and also a bit of searching and reading over other subjects posted in the Off Topic area, you can identify and tag many members with ease. It's fun and educational. It may even help in your personal debate skills if you sometime feel the need to take one on.

http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html



Lord Jedi, who is another member on these forums thinks a person should be banned for saying they have admitted to "baiting" by simply using the word such as I had in the statment above. Well one of his quotes is

lordjedi said:

...

I'm all for most of what's allowed here. It just seems to me that when someone admits to baiting, they deserve at least a temp ban. I guess the community here is small enough that they don't want to alienate anyone though.


Now, I do admit I do enjoy luring or "baiting" people into debate on various subjects of value and monitor their reaction on the internet, yet Lord Jedi has faild to provide any evidence of any actaul "baiting" offence I have done that has broken any OT forum policy or rules. I find his logic quite silly in fact.

Let me put it another way:
If a person admits to having smoked illegal marijuana in public, should they be arrested on the spot without evidence of actually smoking it? If so, then most of our nations greatest music talents would be behind bars.

Now, back to forum rules. What about people who hijack a thread repeatedly? Let's say for argument, on China, and they continue to pull the main subject off topic for their own personal agenda again and again? Should they get a ban? Some moderated forums don't stand for that. What do you think?

Here is an idea: Why not start a new topic about forum policy Lord Jedi, and get back to the subject of China like the rest of us had? I think we understand that you would like to have me banned due to my using the word "baiting" by your continued posting and reposting on the issue in the China thread, and also your personal interpretation of my meaning of the term as it applied to debating tactics. But, to me it almost seems that you are "baiting" members to post off subject in the China thread just to talk about your personal view of what forum policy should be. Sorry, but to me that seems a bit unfair to the person who started the topic, and also people who are posting about the subject of China. I tried to be polite and respond to questions asked to me there, but it seems that we are beating a dead horse over at that thread.

So here I am "baiting' you into a discussion on the subject of what should be Bannable Offenses in it's very own spanking new thread.

I welcome anyone to post what they feel should be a Bannable Offense right here.

P.S. I smoked pot.

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
In the past, being banned has required blatant, repeated trolling and a predilection toward pedophilia.

I'd say your transgressions fall on the lighter side of the spectrum.

I added an ignore feature to the software for a reason. Anyone is welcome to use it.
Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time
Post link
Sorry to double post by I had to comment on one other thing.

lordjedi said:

...

I'm all for most of what's allowed here. It just seems to me that when someone admits to baiting, they deserve at least a temp ban. I guess the community here is small enough that they don't want to alienate anyone though.



There seems to be a flip flop of Lord Jedi's opinion that I did not catch when I had first posted this thread. Before Lord Jedi had posted the quoted comment above in the China thread, he had posted the following comment a number of hours before under the same topic.

lordjedi said:



I do not wish to see you banned. On the contrary, I love debating topics with those of opposing views. However, there are many websites that will not tolerate bullshit. I've seen a fair number of users here that are given a pass on their comments because we tolerate everything. I've seen other sites where very similar users are summarily banned. Since you outright admitted to baiting, I simply mentioned that many many message boards consider that a bannable offense. Your justification of how you "bait" people wouldn't be enough to keep you around. But I guess that mods at OT.com just don't give a shit.


Now I'm not sure what his view truly is. Does he want to see me banned or not? Or is he just raving?

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
Jay said:

In the past, being banned has required blatant, repeated trolling and a predilection toward pedophilia.

I'd say your transgressions fall on the lighter side of the spectrum.

I added an ignore feature to the software for a reason. Anyone is welcome to use it.


Thank you for your wise input Jay! I'm so glad that sober reason prevails on this great site.

That was exactly the point I was trying to make when I posted the following comment in the China thread.
FanFiltration said:



... "Baiting" with the intent to draw someone into a civil dialog, political or social debate is common here, and not done for the use of causing personal grief to members such as personal name calling tactics. "Baiting" for personal attacks is something that I do not endorse or engage in. Please reference a direct act of any bannable type of "Baiting" that you feel I have done here on OT. Harmless "Baiting" can be used in debate for luring a person into using "logical fallacies" such as I mentioned before. A good example of harmful "Baiting" would be the last few posts above directed at me specifically on a past personal medical and legal issue.


“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO REMEMBER IS THAT CERTAIN TOPICS ARE ALWAYS GOING TO BAIT PEOPLE INTO DEBATING. POLITICS AND RELIGION ARE THE TWO MAJOR ONES. I'VE SEEN FRIENDSHIPS ENDED AND FORUMS SPLIT BECAUSE OF THESE TWO TOPICS' DEBATES. IT'S NICE THAT SOME FORUMS ALLOW THESE SUBJECTS, BUT THEY'RE JUST SETTING THEMSELVES UP FOR A BIG CAN OF WORMS TO BE OPENED UP.

EVERYBODY IS GOING TO HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION OF THESE SUBJECTS. IF YOU WANT OTHERS TO RESPECT YOURS THEN YOU HAVE TO RESPECT THEIRS. HOWEVER, THAT RARELY HAPPENS DUE TO DIFFERENT MATURITY LEVELS OF THE FORUM MEMBERS. USUALLY IT JUST TURNS INTO MUD FLINGING. THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. THAT'S ALSO WHY I DON'T ALLOW EITHER SUBJECT ON MY FORUM.

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
*sigh*

FF, you fail to see what's right in front of you. My point was that I don't want to see ANYBODY banned, but sometimes it's necessary. No, I don't want to see you get banned, but if you're going to admit to baiting then yes, I think you deserve at least a temp ban.

No, you didn't make any flagrantly trolling remarks, but that hasn't been a bannable offense in the past either (I'm sure I can find plenty of posts from past members Jay). From the Politics thread to threads in the General Star Wars area to the preservation threads. It's happened in the past and users weren't banned. The reasoning is usually "This isn't TFN, so we're not nearly as strict with bans."

I suppose the fact that you added the "and a predilection toward pedophilia" gives you an out since none of the "flagrant trolls" in the past showed a predilection toward pedophilia.

With all that said, did this really need its own thread? You obviously can't list every instance of what should be considered bannable since new things will come up all the time. That's why most boards list "baiting" and "trolling" as what will likely get you banned. That way they're not locked down to a specific list of items.

EDIT: Is this another one of those times where you think you're being targeted by "gang think" or whatever the hell that term was you used before?
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
lordjedi i believe they are referring to adamwankenobi, that guy was quite a sicko.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
Post link
I don't think he really was a pediphile, I think he was just a stupid young kid, but he seriously overstepped some boundaries in his taunting and made some extremely offensive and frightening threats to one of the members.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
Threats? Like what? Or, if it's easier, just point me to some of his threads. Deviants (the polite term for "psychotic assholes") have always been one of my morbid curiosities.
Author
Time
Post link
Johnboy3434 said:

Threats? Like what? Or, if it's easier, just point me to some of his threads. Deviants (the polite term for "psychotic assholes") have always been one of my morbid curiosities.


SORRY FOR THE DOUBLE POST. adam TRIED EMAILING MY THEN SIX YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. THE $#!+ THAT HE WROTE IN THE EMAIL NEARLY GOT ME ON A PLANE TO END HIM. I WAS ABLE TO TRACK HIM DOWN ALONG WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY. THEY ALL HAPPENED TO LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. I THEN CONTACTED THE POLICE IN THE CITY IN WHICH HE LIVED. I FILED CHARGES AGAINST HIM THAT I THEN PUT ON HOLD. I LET HIM KNOW THAT IF HE EVER TRIED TO CONTACT MY DAUGHTER OR SHOWED BACK UP HERE THAT THE CHARGES WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED. PROBLEM SOLVED.

OH, AND JUST TO PROVE TO HIM THAT I MEANT BUSINESS I SHOWED HIM THE ADDRESS THAT I HAD FOR HIM. THAT WAS ENOUGH PROOF FOR HIM. LIKE I SAID, PROBLEM SOLVED.

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide

Author
Time
Post link
PSYCHO_DAYV said:

SORRY FOR THE DOUBLE POST. adam TRIED EMAILING MY THEN SIX YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. THE $#!+ THAT HE WROTE IN THE EMAIL NEARLY GOT ME ON A PLANE TO END HIM. I WAS ABLE TO TRACK HIM DOWN ALONG WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY. THEY ALL HAPPENED TO LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. I THEN CONTACTED THE POLICE IN THE CITY IN WHICH HE LIVED. I FILED CHARGES AGAINST HIM THAT I THEN PUT ON HOLD. I LET HIM KNOW THAT IF HE EVER TRIED TO CONTACT MY DAUGHTER OR SHOWED BACK UP HERE THAT THE CHARGES WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED. PROBLEM SOLVED.

OH, AND JUST TO PROVE TO HIM THAT I MEANT BUSINESS I SHOWED HIM THE ADDRESS THAT I HAD FOR HIM. THAT WAS ENOUGH PROOF FOR HIM. LIKE I SAID, PROBLEM SOLVED.


People should be able to say whatever the hell they want, even if they are super gay. When people cross the line, however, as was clearly the case with the situation the loud talker is describing, there is NO DOUBT that they should be banned. Given that the member was clearly a pedophile, he should also be dragged out into the street and beaten with wiffle ball bats like the shitbag weirdo that he is. Next time this happens please let me know because I have a whole bunch of wiffle ball bats and I don't work on Saturdays.

HARMY RULES

Author
Time
Post link
PSYCHO_DAYV said:

SORRY FOR THE DOUBLE POST. adam TRIED EMAILING MY THEN SIX YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. THE $#!+ THAT HE WROTE IN THE EMAIL NEARLY GOT ME ON A PLANE TO END HIM. I WAS ABLE TO TRACK HIM DOWN ALONG WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY. THEY ALL HAPPENED TO LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. I THEN CONTACTED THE POLICE IN THE CITY IN WHICH HE LIVED. I FILED CHARGES AGAINST HIM THAT I THEN PUT ON HOLD. I LET HIM KNOW THAT IF HE EVER TRIED TO CONTACT MY DAUGHTER OR SHOWED BACK UP HERE THAT THE CHARGES WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED. PROBLEM SOLVED.

OH, AND JUST TO PROVE TO HIM THAT I MEANT BUSINESS I SHOWED HIM THE ADDRESS THAT I HAD FOR HIM. THAT WAS ENOUGH PROOF FOR HIM. LIKE I SAID, PROBLEM SOLVED.


O_O

Holy Hell. What a fucking nutcase. You showed Herculean levels of restraint by not bashing the motherfucker's skull in. That goes a tad beyond trolling.
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
Oh, please. Adamwankenobi was just a disturbed kid with issues. His actions were limited to the internet. You have to take a lot of things people say in forums with a grain of salt. Can a kid be a pedophile btw?
Dayv, I thought this issue was closed a long time ago but since you bring it up again... Did he actually mail your daughter? Did she read it? How did he get her email address?
What are you talking about ending someone because of an email?!?
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
Not to make light of what happened but what's a 6 year old doing with an email address anyway? The internet is no place for a 6 year old kid....common sense people.

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time
Post link
I'd guess that it was Dayv's e-mail, but it was addressed to his daughter.

Damn, am I glad I joined after him.

A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em

Author
Time
Post link
I wouldn't worry, Ady, he's been corrected by Dayv anyway. But, he did have a point. Read alittlemore carefully, John.

A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em

Author
Time
Post link
It wasn't that I misread it. It was that I misunderstood who they were talking about. Adywan sounded like a good way to shorten adamwankenobi. Please accept my sincerest apologies, Adywan.
Author
Time
Post link
I agree that even mentioning your name by mistake in that context is disconcerting. If Jay sees this thread he should remove your name where it has been mistakenly made reference to.

HARMY RULES

Author
Time
Post link
Johnboy3434 said:

It wasn't that I misread it. It was that I misunderstood who they were talking about. Adywan sounded like a good way to shorten adamwankenobi.


I have to admit, I would occassionally confuse them back in the day as well, I think this is probably the reason.
Author
Time
Post link
I like forums with lax rules on discussion. I prefer things when people are able to discuss what they like.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005