I resign as moderator.

My infraction given to ToR was reversed without consulting me. The administration has undermined my authority as a moderator and I cannot be taken seriously anymore.

I noticed ToR and Plazma were PM'ing with each other intensively, however I was never consulted on anything.

ToR posted my mod PM publicly.

ToR edited my mod edit.

ToR flamed a thread.

ToR spammed her link.

I'm sorry, but I am not going to be a moderator and treated like I do not matter.

regards,

spuriousmonkey.

www.*******************

This is so wrong!!

:(

shes been given a 2 week anyway by plazma

I resign as moderator.

My infraction given to ToR was reversed without consulting me. The administration has undermined my authority as a moderator and I cannot be taken seriously anymore.

I noticed ToR and Plazma were PM'ing with each other intensively, however I was never consulted on anything.

ToR posted my mod PM publicly.

ToR edited my mod edit.

ToR flamed a thread.

ToR spammed her link.

I'm sorry, but I am not going to be a moderator and treated like I do not matter.

regards,

spuriousmonkey.

www.*******************

ToR ToR ToR

The problem seems to be you treated your posters like they didn't matter. Respect has to be earned not demanded.

hey ho, who next to bite the bullet?

I'll tune into her blog to see what she has to say about this, should be interesting.......

ToR posted my mod PM publicly.

ToR edited my mod edit.



both of those are banning offensives

ToR posted my mod PM publicly.

ToR edited my mod edit.



both of those are banning offensives

she's updated the science forum rant blog............oooooh

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.listAll&friendID=69900040&startID=210554252&StartPostedDate=2006-12-28%2000:12:00&next=1&page=1&Mytoken=B0D5F764-7369-4B27-98DFC15B0029198B64819802


oh well back to normal ay folks, now the 'trouble maker' has gone

Some women are prone to psychological issues often causing them to identify failings in their lives and project them onto other people. I believe this to be the case with Spurious and ToR.

For some reason ToR has had a bee up her butt since she reappeared back on the forum with fragrantly spammed links to her blog and malcontent towards all moderators.

Her treatment of members and volunteer staff was unacceptable, however you could see the age old tale of her pushing the limits just to make a Martyr out of her self.

I don't need words to express my opinion:

http://z.about.com/d/cats/1/0/t/K/buzzbomb_argument.jpg

Some women are prone to psychological issues often causing them to identify failings in their lives and project them onto other people. I believe this to be the case with Spurious and ToR.

For some reason ToR has had a bee up her butt since she reappeared back on the forum with fragrantly spammed links to her blog and malcontent towards all moderators.

Her treatment of members and volunteer staff was unacceptable, however you could see the age old tale of her pushing the limits just to make a Martyr out of her self.

I don't need words to express my opinion:

http://z.about.com/d/cats/1/0/t/K/buzzbomb_argument.jpg


teehee, funny :)

men will always resort to this crap when a woman wins, and she did didn't she. She proved bias and hypocrisy are rife here.

Nice Troll ToR. :p

Do note in my previous post I did say "Some women", I know this is not the case for all. I know of women that blow hot and cold and in all due respects seem to be schizophrenic in how they react to what they deem a threat. (In regards to the one I know of, this was during her Menopause which is why she was unsettled for a while)

She devil is a sock puppet of Tor, of course.
She should be banned for evading a ban.

I nominate adstar to be moderator.

Nice Troll ToR. :p

Do note in my previous post I did say "Some women", I know this is not the case for all. I know of women that blow hot and cold and in all due respects seem to be schizophrenic in how they react to what they deem a threat. (In regards to the one I know if, this was during her Menopause which is why she was unsettled for a while)

Ha! I was just going to pound you to bits! How dare you say all women are psychos who project their anger.:mad: :p

Spurious, its early days yet, we're all still finding our feet here. Please reconsider.

"Never a woman scorn" which is an old adage I usually attempt to exist by, just occasionally a woman might find their scorn misdirected.

I know however even writing about my thoughts on this is going to cause people to get the wrong spin on my meaning, in the sense that it's the few that have this occur not all. I'm now going to retreat where it's safe :)

I nominate adstar to be moderator.

AdStar, as a conservative Christian, is probably not the best person to act as a moderator.

The sin of all this is in the extremity of the parsimony, the sheer ingratitude of it all, and that goes for both sides.

ToR put a lot of time and trouble into her response to the aids thing and whether or not you happen to agree with the gist of it the effort was a good deal more intelligent than most of what had gone before, and what thanks did
she get for that?

I think she did well to maintain her grace while hurt so much.

Is most of what goes on here a sad heap of shit?

Yes, of course it is.

Are you going to fix that by repeatedly vomiting so self righteously about it?

No, of course not.

That may serve to deter a casual observer but is rarely seen to achieve much else.

For as long as the site is provided pro bono it sucks to expect to beg while you choose.

If there is another way to attempt, via MySpace or whatever, good luck to them, for that is where the dissent should rather be directed, to try for themselves to see how far they get.

men will always resort to this crap when a woman wins, and she did didn't she. She proved bias and hypocrisy are rife here.

And she wanted to castrate me. Me, of all people! :bugeye: And I've been so nice, to everyone. :(

Vicious internalism or saavy business sense?

edit:
Anyway, I agree with Sam - don't go, spurious. It's a tempest in a teacup.

Having read the dialogue now between these two, I'm confused.

Why was Theory banned?

Says in ban list: insults, flames and spamming

Dialogue seems to start in Metakrons thread.
Metakron was a naughty boy there!

Nobody is being banned. As I recall it I merely asked for a proper discussion of the topic. Going around in circles like meta_kron by stating that there is a problem but never discussing the problem is not discussing AIDS imho.

liar. Cheat. Swindler. Nazi bastard. Licker of ass. Eater of excrement. Beater of women.


YET Metakron recieved no infractions from Spuriousmonkey despite bad insults to Spuriousmonkey etc
and ToR's blog suggests Plasmo said she could use her link and would not be banned for it.

YET after just one post in biology forum which contained no insults or flames, she recieved an offical warning via pm (she published yes) for no reason other than she referred to an objection about the other thread closing.

The warnings and post deletions continued, I watched that one live, now you see it now you don't! The posts deleted were not offensive remotely.

So

insults/flames no where near as bad as Metakrons
link had been approved by admin, so not spam.

Spuriousmonkey's warnings and infractions clearly 'personal' bearing in mind he let Metakron do as he pleased yet warned theory after a single post in his forum.

So why was she banned?

Was it as her blog says nothing more than you don't like her blog?

bit petty

Better watch my step.

the reaon given may have been wrong but she still deserved a ban for

ToR posted my mod PM publicly.

ToR edited my mod edit.

plus i still havnt decided whether you are her sock puppet or not

the reaon given may have been wrong but she still deserved a ban for



plus i still havnt decided whether you are her sock puppet or not

Didn't she say she made the pm public because it was unjustified?
Re the mod edit, again she said she'd been given permission to use the link from plasmos, so again unjustified mod edit.

Two wrongs don't make a right though, I agree
I suppose she should have just reported the problem to Plasmos. Would that have helped I wonder?

Seems personal to me. Spuriousmonkey doesn't like Theory on his thread. He warned her after one inoffensive post.Why?

As for the sockpuppet, that's Devilinside or is it Sandoz?

It's rather poor show members being banned because moderators throw a wobbler about members they dislike, especially when the lack of supporting evidence for the ban is overwhelming and the evidence re bias is overwhelming.

whatever next, I suppose they'll ban me because I am presently number 1 ToR sockpuppett suspect lol!

Oh and devilinside, I reckon he's a contender!

I like spuriousmonkey.

I like no one, I see only hypocrites. It's great fun!

I like spuriousmonkey.


I like you too.

I like Leopold too. Despite that we had our fallouts. But he is a normal person. So am I. Things can be forgiven between normal people. That makes us special (not gay).

Well, not that it matters, but you've got my vote of confidence.

I like you too.

I like Leopold too. Despite that we had our fallouts. But he is a normal person. So am I. Things can be forgiven between normal people. That makes us special (not gay).

so why was she banned?

bearing in mind my earlier comments which demonstrate others doing far worse, you fancy her or something? Did she reject you or what?

One instance of a personal link is tolerated, however TOR posted multiple instances in multiple subforums. She deserved a Ban considering others have in the past been banned for exactly the same action, it would actually be unfair not to ban her.

For the record I don't think her posting in the HIV/AIDs thread had actually anything to do with it.

It's also stated that she did post a private PM and edit a Mod Edit. If she didn't like what had been edited, she could of resolved it with the moderator in question rather than attempting to go over their head by publicly washing her linen in the forums.

One instance of a personal link is tolerated, however TOR posted multiple instances in multiple subforums. She deserved a Ban considering others have in the past been banned for exactly the same action, it would actually be unfair not to ban her.

For the record I don't think her posting in the HIV/AIDs thread had actually anything to do with it.

It's also stated that she did post a private PM and edit a Mod Edit. If she didn't like what had been edited, she could of resolved it with the moderator in question rather than attempting to go over their head by publicly washing her linen in the forums.

I have seen the pm Plasmos sent her, he said it was ok. He said it was NOT spam as she was not selling anything. Seems clear enough to me. Perhaps we need wikipedia re word 'spam'?

"E-mail spam is a subset of spam that involves sending nearly identical messages to numerous recipients by e-mail.

Most definitions of spam are based on the e-mail being Unsolicted Bulk E-mail (UBE). That is, spam is e-mail that is both unsolicited by the recipients and there are many substantively similar e-mails being sent. Spam is usually also unwanted, commercial and sent by automated means and some definitions include those aspects"

yep blog link is not spam.

This is not the reason for the ban fella's and you know it.

Oh and three links is hardly multiple instances lol

re resolving problems with the moderator in question, that good. you should take up comedy proffessionally ;)

lol, this is getting better and better

has anyone got a valid reason for this ban?

Wiki isn't really much of a resource when it comes to a source, you can hardly use it to define "Spam" considering the nature of "Spam" was just a users definition of the word (Which in turn was based on the advertising prowess of the tinned Spam that got renound everywhere)

Spam in regards to links is Unsolicited Bulk Advertisement for a webpage.

Also do try to remember that having Sock Puppets can be a offense worthy of a ban.

I'd suggest that perhaps TOR should just wait for the Temp ban to expire rather than trying to get a permanent one, after all if you want that all you have to do is ask, you don't have to fight anyone for it.

Sorry to hear Spurious, tis better to have been a mod, then not at all.

Wiki isn't really much of a resource when it comes to a source, you can hardly use it to define "Spam" considering the nature of "Spam" was just a users definition of the word (Which in turn was based on the advertising prowess of the tinned Spam that got renound everywhere)

Spam in regards to links is Unsolicited Bulk Advertisement for a webpage.

Also do try to remember that having Sock Puppets can be a offense worthy of a ban.

I'd suggest that perhaps TOR should just wait for the Temp ban to expire rather than trying to get a permanent one, after all if you want that all you have to do is ask, you don't have to fight anyone for it.

I doubt ToR cares much about bans, she's already said as much on her blog.
Meanwhile, plasmos defined her link as not spam so? A two week ban for not spam? ooh a poet.

I doubt ToR cares much about bans, she's already said as much on her blog.
Meanwhile, plasmos defined her link as not spam so? A two week ban for not spam? ooh a poet.

Reading back, there seems to be some sort of relationship between plasmos, and Tor, so can't his word be considered biased?

Having read the dialogue now between these two, I'm confused.

Why was Theory banned?

Says in ban list: insults, flames and spamming

Dialogue seems to start in Metakrons thread.
Metakron was a naughty boy there!






YET Metakron recieved no infractions from Spuriousmonkey despite bad insults to Spuriousmonkey etc
and ToR's blog suggests Plasmo said she could use her link and would not be banned for it.

YET after just one post in biology forum which contained no insults or flames, she recieved an offical warning via pm (she published yes) for no reason other than she referred to an objection about the other thread closing.

The warnings and post deletions continued, I watched that one live, now you see it now you don't! The posts deleted were not offensive remotely.

So

insults/flames no where near as bad as Metakrons
link had been approved by admin, so not spam.

Spuriousmonkey's warnings and infractions clearly 'personal' bearing in mind he let Metakron do as he pleased yet warned theory after a single post in his forum.

So why was she banned?

Was it as her blog says nothing more than you don't like her blog?

bit petty

Better watch my step.

My my, wasn't Meta one of ToR's little underdogs she was trying so hard to defend? So why are you ragging on him now? Nice attempt to draw attention away from yourself.

Meta did receive infractions and did receive a "pre-ban".

ToR was banned because she kept breaking all the rules that she knew would lead to a ban (eg posting Mod warning sent to her, posting other mod PM's sent to her, editing a Mod edit, spamming, continuous flaming, and insults). Now, everyone else who has behaved that way in the past has been banned, why do you expect ToR to be different to anyone else?

We are all bound by the same rules. Sure we all break them sometimes and we get warnings and if we keep going, we'd get a ban without question. ToR had received plenty of warnings for her behaviour and she ignored each one, instead posting the warnings in the threads and claiming how she was expecting a ban, etc. Well the ban she was expecting for repeatedly breaking the rules that we are all bound to has come to fruition.

I doubt ToR cares much about bans, she's already said as much on her blog.
Meanwhile, plasmos defined her link as not spam so? A two week ban for not spam? ooh a poet.
As for the spamming, she was given permission to use her link sparingly, but she just kept on spamming it over and over again in just about every post she made. Now, had anyone else done the same thing, it would have resulted in the same outcome. A ban. She cares about the ban because she/you are still here fighting about it.

Plus she/you are forgetting that she committed several other offences which do result in bans for other members (eg editing modedit, posting mod PM's.. and not just once, continuous insults to members and moderators (spurious), flaming, etc). As for the modedit, she could have just reposted her link with her belief that she was allowed to post it instead of editing a modedit. She received repeated warnings, many of which she posted for all to see.

Now why do you think she should be different to every other member in how she behaves?

Someone post me a link to where it says that you can't post a mod warning. That doesn't make sense.

Someone post me a link to where it says that you can't post a mod warning. That doesn't make sense.

Bells is funny, she hasn't seen plasmo's pm, I have. She's wrapped up in me being a sock. If I get banned they'll say it is because I am a sock, but the reality is, I'm pointing out their errors and asking a question they can't answer. Their insistance I am sock is thier build up to a second unjustifed ban. Prove it....oh you can't can you. But the ban will come anyway, unless I shut up.

Why was she banned Plasmo ?

My my, wasn't Meta one of ToR's little underdogs she was trying so hard to defend? So why are you ragging on him now? Nice attempt to draw attention away from yourself.

Meta did receive infractions and did receive a "pre-ban".

ToR was banned because she kept breaking all the rules that she knew would lead to a ban (eg posting Mod warning sent to her, posting other mod PM's sent to her, editing a Mod edit, spamming, continuous flaming, and insults). Now, everyone else who has behaved that way in the past has been banned, why do you expect ToR to be different to anyone else?

We are all bound by the same rules. Sure we all break them sometimes and we get warnings and if we keep going, we'd get a ban without question. ToR had received plenty of warnings for her behaviour and she ignored each one, instead posting the warnings in the threads and claiming how she was expecting a ban, etc. Well the ban she was expecting for repeatedly breaking the rules that we are all bound to has come to fruition.


As for the spamming, she was given permission to use her link sparingly, but she just kept on spamming it over and over again in just about every post she made. Now, had anyone else done the same thing, it would have resulted in the same outcome. A ban. She cares about the ban because she/you are still here fighting about it.

Plus she/you are forgetting that she committed several other offences which do result in bans for other members (eg editing modedit, posting mod PM's.. and not just once, continuous insults to members and moderators (spurious), flaming, etc). As for the modedit, she could have just reposted her link with her belief that she was allowed to post it instead of editing a modedit. She received repeated warnings, many of which she posted for all to see.

Now why do you think she should be different to every other member in how she behaves?

LIES:
1)
she used the link three times not in every post
2) she was NOT told to use it sparingly, she was told it did not represent spam as it contained no advertising..would you like to see a copy of the pm?
3)The mod pm being posted publically, well I personally don't agree with that, but she said it was unjustified and why should spurious or you be worried if it was justified? Nothing to hide surely?
4) Mod edit over ruled - she had permission to use the link- so mod edit invalid according to her, again not my thing but her point of view. So far no adequate challengers.

Gonna ban me for asking questions, history repeating itself. Spurious had a thing for her that's obvious. ;) you all need to get over it and concentrate on the shameful display you're making of yourselves.

You know you can't offer a challenge by making it up as you go along! Good try though. ;)

..would you like to see a copy of the pm?

yes, verbatum.

yes, verbatum.

well she's posted it on her blog:
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=69900040&blogID=211141374&MyToken=330bd92f-4ad6-4a68-bdf1-d00474dab09b

this is the relevant bit though:

"And yes... you won't be banned for self advertising, because you don't sell anything and you don't share malware to our computers."

The blog does prove to spurious though that plasmos fought his corner. So maybe they can kiss and make up now?


seems Bells was also wrong about spurious giving Metakron infractions, according to plasmo none of them were from him!

Anyway I get the message from you both. But I'd still like to know why she was banned.

Prove it....oh you can't can you.

Not in the unusual event that a member uses more than one internet service provider, but if the same internet connection is used by two ostensibly different forum members the identical IP address would immediately give the game away.

Alternatively a ban may be implemented against the IP address rather than the member name, to block all members from the one location.

In the mean time then, in the absence of any official evidence to that effect, previous accusations of member malpractice are out of order and ill advised. Instead of the outright libel, concerns would better be referred privately to the forum administrators in the better position to know.

AdStar, as a conservative Christian, is probably not the best person to act as a moderator.



Why is that.


We can have Atheist Mods but OH NO NO when a Christian gets the position?

this is the relevant bit though:

"And yes... you won't be banned for self advertising, because you don't sell anything and you don't share malware to our computers."
isn't what plasma said.
But I'd still like to know why she was banned.
ask TOR, she knows.

So SheDevil isn't TOR?

So SheDevil isn't TOR?
haven't a clue, frankly i could care less.

this is the relevant bit though:

"And yes... you won't be banned for self advertising, because you don't sell anything and you don't share malware to our computers."

.

so Bells, where does it say here, use the link sparingly?
This is a blatant coverup and you Bells are perhaps innocently aiding and abetting, perhaps you were told by plasmo he said xyz instead of abc?

ah that is over the top....this is not exactly of National importance, just a way to pass time.

Spurious resigned as he felt Plasmo did not support him. The pm shows he clearly did. So, that's the end of his reasons for resigning BUT we are still left with the fact it does appear ToR was only banned to passify spurious's misunderstanding with plasmo. Hardly democratic. Anyway

night all, don't take this too seriously, if ToR's not that bothered and plasmo and spurious are cool, why should you be? You only have your virtual reputations to worry about afterall ;)

Alls well that ends well.

isn't what plasma said.

ask TOR, she knows.


It's rather easy to prove. She told me she forwarded his pm to a fellow member before she was banned. So someone has the original impossible to edit version. Also it'll be in her pm file.

night night leopold, sorry to burst your ToR is lying bubble, she's clearly not. She was told it was not spam and that is the end of the matter. Move on I am.

So much drama for an online forum :(

I think over the years bans have actually picked up on the forum and yet the forum is progressively going to shit with morons posting polls and one-word replies and derailing threads by the second post..

Why?

[...] the sheer ingratitude of it all [...] ToR put a lot of time and trouble into her response to the aids thing [...] and what thanks did
she get for that?The real question is why did she waltz back in here and jump right into one of the most currently popular threads of the time? The subject matter here is not the issue. Her actions clearly are.

Why was Theory banned? Says in ban list: insults, flames and spamming [...] YET Metakron recieved no infractions from Spuriousmonkey despite bad insults to Spuriousmonkey [...]You're not very good at psychology and perspective history are you, especially character psychology? MetaKron, under tight and current circumstances, was throwing a tantrum from sheer frustration—letting off steam.

I resign as moderator.

My infraction given to ToR was reversed without consulting me. The administration has undermined my authority as a moderator and I cannot be taken seriously anymore.

I noticed ToR and Plazma were PM'ing with each other intensively, however I was never consulted on anything.

ToR posted my mod PM publicly.

ToR edited my mod edit.

ToR flamed a thread.

ToR spammed her link.

I'm sorry, but I am not going to be a moderator and treated like I do not matter.

regards,

spuriousmonkey.

www.*******************

And where is the inquisitive and analytical scientist, Spurious, who would be curious to get to the bottom of this maladjustment? Or perhaps the Monkey is being too impatient.

shedevil
can i ask a question befor you go?

So much drama for an online forum :*(

I think over the years bans have actually picked up on the forum and yet the forum is progressively going to shit with morons posting polls and one-word replies and derailing threads by the second post..

Why?

The drama/flame wars are fine but rarely permitted to peak, hence culminate. Instead they die off an immature and coercive death. God. It surprises me how much anticlimax is tolerated here. Impotent jerks.

Bells is funny, she hasn't seen plasmo's pm, I have. She's wrapped up in me being a sock. If I get banned they'll say it is because I am a sock, but the reality is, I'm pointing out their errors and asking a question they can't answer. Their insistance I am sock is thier build up to a second unjustifed ban. Prove it....oh you can't can you. But the ban will come anyway, unless I shut up.

Why was she banned Plasmo ?

For someone who doesn't care they were banned, you sure are 'caring' quite a bit aren't you?

As for the PM from Plazma, whether I have seen it or not is none of your business or concern.

You aren't pointing out the "errors", you are merely pointing out repeatedly why her ban was deserved in the first place. Every single member in the past who has posted a mod's PM has been banned without question. Every single poster who has in the past edited a moderator's edit has received a ban. Yet you persist in expecting that ToR somehow be exempt from rules that affect every one else? Why?

LIES:
1)
she used the link three times not in every post
2) she was NOT told to use it sparingly, she was told it did not represent spam as it contained no advertising..would you like to see a copy of the pm?
3)The mod pm being posted publically, well I personally don't agree with that, but she said it was unjustified and why should spurious or you be worried if it was justified? Nothing to hide surely?
4) Mod edit over ruled - she had permission to use the link- so mod edit invalid according to her, again not my thing but her point of view. So far no adequate challengers.

Gonna ban me for asking questions, history repeating itself. Spurious had a thing for her that's obvious. you all need to get over it and concentrate on the shameful display you're making of yourselves.

You know you can't offer a challenge by making it up as you go along! Good try though.
I did not lie about Meta's infractions. He did receive them, quite a few of them actually from other moderators and members for his insults. So what's your point?

As for her links, she was told she would not be banned for having used them. But reading what you have posted, it is plain to see that it did not mean she could keep posting links to it. And she did not just post it 3 times. She posted it a lot more than that, and as is her habit, she waited a while and then edited or deleted the post.

If she felt her warnings received in PM's were unjustified, she could have reported it, complained about it to one of the admin or other moderators. She did not have to post the PM for all to see. It is called a "Private Message" for a reason.

Now regarding her modedit. If she felt it was unjustified, she could have reported it (by clicking on the report button), sent a PM to admin or a supermod, she could have written a post to complain about it, hell she could also have reposted it and advised that she felt she had permission to keep spamming it. But she chose not to. Instead she chose to edit a modedit. Something that every single person who has done the same before her has been banned for. She knew exactly what she was doing. She's been around here long enough to know the rules, so she can hardly claim ignorance now can she?

Whether she thinks spurious had a thing for her or not is irrelavent and frankly personal and private. She knew the rules and she broke them repeatedly, even after being warned not to. Again, why do you expect that she be treated differently to every single other poster on this site? I've received warnings in the past and I didn't post them for all to see and stopped doing what I'd been warned about. In fact, I think most of us have known enough to not keep flouting the rules even after being warned. Why do you expect that she somehow is above everyone else?


As to the sockpuppet issue. Do you honestly think we can't check?

In the meantime, you should take Sauna's advice:

concerns would better be referred privately to the forum administrators in the better position to know.

The real question is why did she waltz back in here and jump right into one of the most currently popular thread of the time? The subject matter here is not the issue. Her actions clearly are.

So now all of a sudden the masqueraders want to get real with who is who and what is what.

OK then, this should be fun; go right ahead, give us your real name and home address plus a character reference from your employer, bank manager, or whosoever to back up your CV and we'll take it from there then, shall we?

Theoryofrelativity has been temporarily banned.
SheDevil has been permanently banned as a sock puppet of TOR.

Using sock puppets to evade bans goes against the whole point of having bans in the first place.

Any more sock puppets will result in the permanent banning of both the sock puppets and the original name (in this case, TOR).